Waveform 9 review...

[gesslr]

My thought is that if you can do #2, you would not need a ghost track.....you could take the signal directly from the filter....?

Yeh. I'm a big fan of BWS's modulation system. I was very glad to see the improvements in W9.

Ok. I don't think I understand your #2 idea, or we maybe have different expectations.

I'll wait till you can try it and post more.

OK. Gave it a quick whirl. No luck.

I guess I thought it would be clever if you could drop an envelope modulator directly on to an Aux Send plugin/filter (that is inserted on a track) and tap the audio at that point for use with your target elsewhere. Then you could get around the problem of having access to only post-fader, post-fx audio for your control signal.

So on a track with a drum loop, I put an Aux Send filter as the first filter on the track, then put a delay after that. I dragged an envelope modulator/modifier to the Aux Send filter, then dragged the filter to the volume control of another track. If my idea worked, turning the delay on or off should have no effect on the control signal going to the volume fader as the delay is after the Aux Send filter. Unfortunately turning on the delay changed the periodicity of the other track's volume fader as well as the send level of the Aux Send I dropped the modifier on. So the envelope modifier obviously can't use the Aux Send as a "tap". It listens to the final output of the channel it's dropped on from what I can see.

Well, back to work!

[HansP]

the basic concept of tracktion used to be the great symmetry.
tracks and plugins as central objects, and anything else is a variant of that.

but now, this envelope follower does not look symmetric at all.
I thought, it should have the abilities of a rack plugin. then it can sit anywhere in the plugin chain, and can be used in other tracks also, as a return wire.

but if the envelope follower is a simple plugin, then it can be put into a rack, and bingo. it just requires that we have an improved symmetry in terms of using a "control voltage" in the same place as an audio signal.
perhaps the fader should have a visible input for a control voltage, that can be switched on, so it becomes a VCA. is this the case?

[dRowAudio]

Hi Robert (and the others following your thread), firstly a huge thank you for such a detailed, informative and fair look at Waveform 9. Your feedback is most welcome and we hope we can use it and the ensuing discussions to make the software better.

I thought the best way for me to fill in some missing gaps and explain some of the decisions or reasons behind they way things are in Waveform is to simply go through some of the points that I think deserve it. So here goes!

I found no way to automatically connect I/O between plugins

Yes, there currently isn’t a way to connect I/O pins between plugins (there are options to connect I/O pins to tracks or a plugin to I/O pins though by right clicking the rack background or button in the Rack properties panel), mainly because the UX needs a bit more thinking out. Personally I’d like to add some kind of drag action between two plugins to sequentially connect them but new UI like this takes a relatively large amount of time compared to a menu option or button.

You can add Modifiers to racks, but not inside of racks

Yes, this is a current limitation. We wanted to get Modifiers settled and tested first and essentially ran out of time to put them in Racks. However, this will be coming at some point as it was one of the original motivations for the feature!

OS shortcuts don’t always work

I can see why this would be annoying but it’s one of the complexities of creating cross-platform software. Not only does the code have to be easy to write and consistent across platforms, we also have to think of all of our manuals, videos and training material. It’s a lot easier to use the same key commands between platforms rather than having to resort to native things. This also makes it easier when we add actions/commands as not all platforms have the same set of native commands.

OS level features like menu searching (on the Mac) is a super handy feature, it’s just we’ve made a decision to not use menu-bar-like menus for a couple of reasons. Firstly, menus take up some screen real-estate and as the relevant items are presented elsewhere in the interface, we decided not to use up 25px of screen real-estate with a menu. Also native menus aren’t always visible such as when running full-screen on the Mac. Mousing to the top of the window to show the menu is particularly annoying.
However mainly its because we’ve always tried to be as contextual as possible in Tracktion so that usually means “you select something, then see what you can do with it by looking in the properties panel”. This often involves showing things visually (e.g. track images) which simply don’t suit the text-heavy menu-bar models.
More over, it’s an aesthetic thing and we like to be a bit different. Some please like Reaper’s heavy use of menus and it works well for them, here at Tracktion we’re not so keen. That’s just a design decision we’ve made and it often gets cited as one of the strongest points of the software.

I do like the idea of searching for actions though, I might add something in the future to enable you to open a search box and search for actions to trigger. This would probably work similarly to macOS Spotlight but search the keyboard shortcuts and Javascript actions. Displaying only the possible actions in this list would be the difficult thing to determine though…

No scripting - e.g. AppleScript

As a developer I’m a big fan of scripting so would love to add some native level scripting so things can be automated however this is a huge task to implement for all the different languages/APIs you mention across three operating systems. I just don’t think enough users would actually use them for it to be worth the time required to add and maintain.
We’ve started to make the app more flexible with the addition of Javascript and will be expanding upon this all the time. I’m also thinking of adding command line parameters so you can use Waveform from the command line (and hence from any scripting environment) to do common tasks.

Out of interest, what sort of things are you looking to build Applescripts for or automate tasks? It would be interesting to know if there’s things that are missing or if there are existing ways to do what you desire.

Selecting a track does not show the Volume&Pan or Meter properties

Yes, this is an artefact of having an entirely modular track mixer. Both the volume/pan and meters are plugins on the track so it doesn’t really make sense to show them in the Track properties.
Granted, we could show them in a similar way to the mixer (using the last two) but I’m not quite sure how useful that would be?

No smart shortening of names

Yes I agree. Again, this is mostly due to time constraints. If you’ve got any pointers to some resources or libraries for this kind of thing I’d be interested to see them. I know there are some fairly stock techniques for name shortening. Basically it just needs a bit of research.

Show outputs isn’t interactive

Yes, again time just didn’t permit adding this and as the destination of tracks isn’t changed that often (I’d also be surprised if many people have them visible in the mixer unless they do a lot of complex routing) it just didn’t make the feature cut.

Fader section is resizable

We wanted to make it resizable so the faders can be as big as you need them. If you’re viewing the mixer on a separate screen it is possible to make them reach almost the entire screen height (depending on what else you have visible).
The reason for the control positioning switch is that after a certain height, the vertically stacked solo/mute/pan controls just look silly. We have to choose a time to move them to the top as visually it looks a lot better. With reactive design like this there will always be some trade-offs.

Arrangement follows mixer, ALWAYS

Yes, I think we made the correct decision here, otherwise, we’d need two properties panel to show the two different selections.
Incidentally, this is exactly what you can do if you click the “show mixer in separate tab” button (just above the mixer strip width buttons) as there you do have a separate properties panel! This was one of the reasons for adding this.
As for the auto scrolling feature I can see and have heard arguments in favour of always keeping things on screen and no. Personally I think it would be annoying if you’re working in the mixer panel and every time you selected a track it would move your arrange window. That’s why this only happens when you explicitly change track selection with the “alt/opt + arrows”. However, maybe we need to expose this “keep selection on screen” action so it can be manually invoked.

Track selection doesn’t affect mixer controls

This is a current limitation in the mixer. However, in the arrange view you can do this if you select multiple tracks, you can solo/mute them using the buttons in the properties panel.
To control multiple volume/pans, select the volume/pan plugins in the track mixer area and then move the sliders, they’ll all change.

No way to control multiple volume at once

See above^^^

Aux sends can’t follow mutes

Maybe you need to enable “solo isolate” for tracks with aux sends on?

Metering

Yes we don’t currently have all those options, you can adjust the meter hold and fall rate from the “Settings” -> “Appearance” -> “Meters” section though.

No way to control multiple pans, mutes or solos either

See above^^^

VCAs

I understand the slight annoyance in our VCA implementation. I think this was originally designed to be easier to follow i.e. you put something in a folder and then can scale the volume of everything it contains.
A new type of VCA that can be assigned to volume plugins could be a nice idea, maybe this would work best as a Modifier…

Renaming Tracks

There’s a keyboard shortcut to rename a track although it doesn’t have a default key assignment.
More advanced options are available through the use of Javascript macros. You could write one to rename a track based on the clip contents.

The Envelope Follower audio input

There’s so many ways that you could route audio that I simply opted for the simplest first.
I did think about adding pre-post options but thought in most cases you’d want post as that’s closer to what you hear.
I’ll probably add a more flexible one in the future where you can choose the input source and position, similar to plugin side chaining.

Meta modifiers

Yes, I’d love to add something like this. We’d probably do it as some kind of operator in the assignments list for each parameter so you can chain them together in a specific way.

The Y axis of most modulators is unlabeled

Do you mean the graphical displays? For these, the scale is always normalised, showing a central line if it’s bipolar. I think it’ just simplifies the displays not to include more grid lines and markers than necessary but if there’s a large demand we can add them.

MIDI Assignment

They’re standard parameter assignments so are found in the “Automation” -> “Create MIDI Controller Mappings” option. This could be better named to perhaps “Show MIDI Controller Mappings” but having assign overlays when in MIDI learn mode is an oversight and should be added.

Single screen

As you said, with W8 we simply can’t fit everything on one screen so have started to branch out in to other windows. This makes a lot of sense with todays common hi-res, multi-monitor setups. We’re still fine-tuning this though and have some ideas in the pipeline to declutter the interface a bit and make the controls you actually use take centre stage. UI changes like this take such a huge amount of time it’s difficult to justify them though, especially as we can’t really do it bit by bit or test it out first, we essentially have to get it right straight away and hope everyone doesn’t hate it…

Racks and modifiers

As I mentioned above we will be adding these relatively soon.

I have a feeling that tracktion uses an integer based sample representation, or did so for a while.

One of the major side effects of this type of internal architecture is dropped notes and the beginning of clips not playing correctly, but only at certain tempos. You may recall that Tracktion had both of these issues for a very long time. So that's why I am making that guess.

Actually we don’t, we store everything as double precision floats (up to 20 decimal places in the project files). For MIDI this is stored in beats, for most other things this is a time in seconds.
With precision this high we shouldn’t really get any rounding errors.

If you do spot issues we’ll be sure to take a look, however I think the issue you are talking about was actually a problem with how we were handling voice resetting. There was a bug that enabled an all-notes-off message to get interleaved with first notes from clips which meant notes were started but immediately stopped. This should be fixed with W9 as we reworked the entire note-handling system to deal with multiple MPE streams.


=================================================================================
I think that addresses most of the points in the articles. I’d like to also add a few more things that might help explain some the workflow we have that drives our feature lists and deadlines:

When features are lacking in places, it’s almost always a matter of time. We tend to focus on the big things first then let users tell us how they would like to use features so we can refine them. However this doesn’t always happen because we need to add new things to drive sales.
It’s annoying that only big, new, flashy features warrant magazine reviews, videos and forum discussions but that’s the way things are. No magazine wants to review a point release to say we’ve added a quicker way to connect Rack plugin pins...
As we’re entirely customer funded, the reality is that if we don’t drive sales, we will go out of business.

(As a side note I really think the public beta period helped us in that respect this year. We actually had time to make changes to features before the full release based on customer feedback).

As a company we’re very small. Our Waveform dev team consists of effectively 1.5 full time employees (and I also have to oversee various other aspects of the business so it’s not like we have 1.5 developers working full time coding on Waveform). Unfortunately there’s only so much you can get done in this time. (Incidentally, this is actually the smallest we’ve ever been on the app side since Jules was doing it all by himself!).



I particularly liked your footnotes about how long the posts took you to construct. It’s a really eye opening piece of information that readers don’t often think about or value when they read things. (This might also help explain why we can’t respond in full to everything posted on KVR…)

For increased transparency I’d like to do the same here:
This post took me 3 hours to read, research, write and edit.

[Robert Randolph]

Hi Robert (and the others following your thread), firstly a huge thank you for such a detailed, informative and fair look at Waveform 9. Your feedback is most welcome and we hope we can use it and the ensuing discussions to make the software better.

I thought the best way for me to fill in some missing gaps and explain some of the decisions or reasons behind they way things are in Waveform is to simply go through some of the points that I think deserve it. So here goes!

Thank you for the response!

There's still a number of more parts to the review coming. I'm only about 25% done (or less?). Next one should be out tomorrow hopefully.

I found no way to automatically connect I/O between plugins

Yes, there currently isn’t a way to connect I/O pins between plugins (there are options to connect I/O pins to tracks or a plugin to I/O pins though by right clicking the rack background or button in the Rack properties panel), mainly because the UX needs a bit more thinking out. Personally I’d like to add some kind of drag action between two plugins to sequentially connect them but new UI like this takes a relatively large amount of time compared to a menu option or button.

I'm a big fan of searchable menus. Being able to right click and search for a parameter to connect is much nicer than having to click and drag, especially when you have a big rack.

Anything that reduces the burden of having to visually navigate a rack of tiny dots would be great. I read english, not dots and lines (You should see my patchbays and cabling, It's all fastidiously labelled and I maintain notated charts of all of my I/O and routing. I try to avoid the 'cable trace' game as much as possible!)

You can add Modifiers to racks, but not inside of racks

Yes, this is a current limitation. We wanted to get Modifiers settled and tested first and essentially ran out of time to put them in Racks. However, this will be coming at some point as it was one of the original motivations for the feature!

Do you mind if I add a note to the review mentioning that this is likely coming?

No scripting - e.g. AppleScript

Out of interest, what sort of things are you looking to build Applescripts for or automate tasks? It would be interesting to know if there’s things that are missing or if there are existing ways to do what you desire.

Mostly something like http://www.hammerspoon.org/go/ which allows you to create custom GUIs that interact with software. This allows things like global shortcuts, menubar items (to play/pause/jump while the software is in the background), multi-app macros for things like import/render etc...

See something like this https://latenitefilms.com/blog/final-cut-pro-hacks/ is possible and often helpful.

Two things that I personally find very useful are global shortcuts and render/import/convert workflows.

Selecting a track does not show the Volume&Pan or Meter properties

Yes, this is an artefact of having an entirely modular track mixer. Both the volume/pan and meters are plugins on the track so it doesn’t really make sense to show them in the Track properties.
Granted, we could show them in a similar way to the mixer (using the last two) but I’m not quite sure how useful that would be?

I understand the reasoning for this, however it still does make mixing a track require extra steps.

No smart shortening of names

Yes I agree. Again, this is mostly due to time constraints. If you’ve got any pointers to some resources or libraries for this kind of thing I’d be interested to see them. I know there are some fairly stock techniques for name shortening. Basically it just needs a bit of research.

I did investigate this, and I asked a number of friends in the industry. Nobody wants to give up their techniques I also was unable to find any appropriate libraries for this functionality.

Fader section is resizable

We wanted to make it resizable so the faders can be as big as you need them. If you’re viewing the mixer on a separate screen it is possible to make them reach almost the entire screen height (depending on what else you have visible).
The reason for the control positioning switch is that after a certain height, the vertically stacked solo/mute/pan controls just look silly. We have to choose a time to move them to the top as visually it looks a lot better. With reactive design like this there will always be some trade-offs.

I personally think it should be up to the user what looks silly or not in this case. Some of us would prefer the functionality of larger meters/faders I think.

Trying to increase the meter/fader size and having it become smaller is not a particularly enjoyable experience.

Aux sends can’t follow mutes

Maybe you need to enable “solo isolate” for tracks with aux sends on?

Yep.

I missed this since I was looking in the Aux Send/Return parameters for this feature. Thanks. I will update this.

VCAs

I understand the slight annoyance in our VCA implementation. I think this was originally designed to be easier to follow i.e. you put something in a folder and then can scale the volume of everything it contains.
A new type of VCA that can be assigned to volume plugins could be a nice idea, maybe this would work best as a Modifier…

A VCA Modifier would be excellent, but then there would need to be a way to easily assign a single modifier to multiple plugins.

The VCA would need to be able to appear in the mixer as well.

Another feature that appears to be missing is a way to coalesce or merge VCA automation with children. I did not mention this because I appear to be the only person on earth that cares about this.

Renaming Tracks

There’s a keyboard shortcut to rename a track although it doesn’t have a default key assignment.
More advanced options are available through the use of Javascript macros. You could write one to rename a track based on the clip contents.

That is a good point, but I think that automatic naming of new tracks on import is a fairly basic feature.

I can't think of a single instance where someone imports 'Drum Overheads 9.wav' and they want their track to be named 'Track 48'.

The Y axis of most modulators is unlabeled

Do you mean the graphical displays? For these, the scale is always normalised, showing a central line if it’s bipolar. I think it’ just simplifies the displays not to include more grid lines and markers than necessary but if there’s a large demand we can add them.

Yes, I meant the graphical displays.

I mentioned this because it's useful to help learn what modifier positions map to certain assignment % and parameter values. This would be particularly useful on the step modifier I think.

It's not really important, but I did find it bothersome when I wanted to replicate a result I had previously. Just being able to build a somewhat intuitive idea of what's happening, I think, requires some better way of mapping values to results.

Single screen

As you said, with W8 we simply can’t fit everything on one screen so have started to branch out in to other windows. This makes a lot of sense with todays common hi-res, multi-monitor setups. We’re still fine-tuning this though and have some ideas in the pipeline to declutter the interface a bit and make the controls you actually use take centre stage. UI changes like this take such a huge amount of time it’s difficult to justify them though, especially as we can’t really do it bit by bit or test it out first, we essentially have to get it right straight away and hope everyone doesn’t hate it…

I understand this 100%.

This is one of those cases where I feel like I have a responsibility to my readers to mention things that may be offputting or strange. I do think that this qualifies.

I did try to communicate how this is potentially an awesome 'feature' though. I hope I was able to communicate the uniqueness with the pros and cons in a reasonable way.

I have a feeling that tracktion uses an integer based sample representation, or did so for a while.

One of the major side effects of this type of internal architecture is dropped notes and the beginning of clips not playing correctly, but only at certain tempos. You may recall that Tracktion had both of these issues for a very long time. So that's why I am making that guess.

Actually we don’t, we store everything as double precision floats (up to 20 decimal places in the project files). For MIDI this is stored in beats, for most other things this is a time in seconds.
With precision this high we shouldn’t really get any rounding errors.

If you do spot issues we’ll be sure to take a look, however I think the issue you are talking about was actually a problem with how we were handling voice resetting. There was a bug that enabled an all-notes-off message to get interleaved with first notes from clips which meant notes were started but immediately stopped. This should be fixed with W9 as we reworked the entire note-handling system to deal with multiple MPE streams.

Great info, thanks!

=================================================================================
I think that addresses most of the points in the articles. I’d like to also add a few more things that might help explain some the workflow we have that drives our feature lists and deadlines:

When features are lacking in places, it’s almost always a matter of time. We tend to focus on the big things first then let users tell us how they would like to use features so we can refine them. However this doesn’t always happen because we need to add new things to drive sales.
It’s annoying that only big, new, flashy features warrant magazine reviews, videos and forum discussions but that’s the way things are. No magazine wants to review a point release to say we’ve added a quicker way to connect Rack plugin pins...
As we’re entirely customer funded, the reality is that if we don’t drive sales, we will go out of business.

(As a side note I really think the public beta period helped us in that respect this year. We actually had time to make changes to features before the full release based on customer feedback).

As a company we’re very small. Our Waveform dev team consists of effectively 1.5 full time employees (and I also have to oversee various other aspects of the business so it’s not like we have 1.5 developers working full time coding on Waveform). Unfortunately there’s only so much you can get done in this time. (Incidentally, this is actually the smallest we’ve ever been on the app side since Jules was doing it all by himself!).

Understood.

I will say though that I have a good number more articles to write in this interview series. Currently my notes have 20 major 'Good' points, 1 'Bad' point and about 4-5 'Weird' points.

You guys are doing pretty awesome.

I particularly liked your footnotes about how long the posts took you to construct. It’s a really eye opening piece of information that readers don’t often think about or value when they read things. (This might also help explain why we can’t respond in full to everything posted on KVR…)

For increased transparency I’d like to do the same here:
This post took me 3 hours to read, research, write and edit.

[gesslr]

Really, really, really appreciate this dialogue fellas. It's informative and helpful.

G

[PierreG]

Welcome back Dave!

Deeply grateful for this deep and informative exchange.

Great work Robert, which is obviously contributing good things to Waveform's evolution.

As for the size of the Tracktion dev team (1.5), I'm amazed by what you've been able to accomplish.

Cheers!

[Robert Randolph]

Part 3 is live.

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... art-3.html

[HansP]

Thanks everyone TSC and commenters for exceptional work, that is also exciting to watch. 100 points to Gryffindor.

Should there be a special "track macros" plugin, that connects all plugins of a particular track, or as many as we need?
This plugin and its virtual parameters (that are created and named by the user) would be the object to automate, and from there, it branches into other plugins of the track, and does that little arithmetic, in a similar way which the current macro section is doing already about one plugin at a time. It would simplify the workflow to set up automation macros. For cross-track macro stuff, still the rack can be used, but its use is harder to understand.
(I hope I got it right, from Robert's description of the current feature.)

-
In analogy to the side-chaining latency issue, please can you check out if the automation curve exactly hits the waveform in the audio in sync (because we draw it e.g. to a vowel or sibilant in the vocals that is visible in the clip display). There may be some plugins in the vocal chain that have massive latency.

[Robert Randolph]

Thanks everyone TSC and commenters for exceptional work, that is also exciting to watch. 100 points to Gryffindor.

Should there be a special "track macros" plugin, that connects all plugins of a particular track, or as many as we need?
This plugin and its virtual parameters (that are created and named by the user) would be the object to automate, and from there, it branches into other plugins of the track, and does that little arithmetic, in a similar way which the current macro section is doing already about one plugin at a time. It would simplify the workflow to set up automation macros. For cross-track macro stuff, still the rack can be used, but its use is harder to understand.
(I hope I got it right, from Robert's description of the current feature.)

Tracks already have their own macro parameters that allow you to access all the plugins on a track. So I don't think that's necessary.

The only 'deficiency' that I think exists is the extra steps to work with macro parameters across tracks.

Of course... someone may correct me on that again.

[HansP]

>Tracks already have their own macro parameters
Great! Didn't see this. So I can create a track MP and give it its own automation track?


--- about name shortening
I once had coded a concept for an address database.

Input: string of 1-3 words, separated by spaces.
Output: third word truncated to 12 letters, first to 4 letters, second to 2 letters. No spaces, but first letter of each is capitalized.
(assuming first name, middle name, family name, so we get keys in meaningful alphabetic order)
If it would create a key that exists already in the database, then have a running counter, and add a digit (no more than 10 duplos assumed, but a 2-digit systems seems reasonable).

There is a version for company names, and here comes the trick:
Naturally the string is longer and has many words.
Trivial components of a company name get deleted already at start, and there is a keyword list for this. (contains words like: limited, of, at, office, agency,..)
Other keywords with some relevance have applied a library of abbreviations. (in our audio version: compressor=> Cpr)
Thus we can have prepared libraries that get applied in stacked form, for deletion of trivial, and for shortening instrument names and typical plugin names, and also some other musical expressions, like harmony vocal=>HrmVc.
After this is done, apply the truncating algo as above, but don't touch or count the words that were translated already.

The libraries can sit in XML files, so the user can create her own codes and replacements.
We can use different libraries and truncation parameters for track names and plugin names.

[chico.co.uk]

This is all really interesting guys ... nice one

[dRowAudio]

Part 3 is live.

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... art-3.html

Thanks for the update!

One small note that you may have overlooked here is:

I would like if you could turn on the macro parameter assignment, then move a control on the plugin GUI to trigger selection. However I’m quite happy with how Macro Parameters are implemented regardless.

This should work. If you open the plugin UI and move a control, it will jump to the top of the list, just below the search box (it has a slightly darker background).

You might not be seeing the parameter you expect if you're using a multi-parameter control from the UI e.g. the EQ handles control freq and gain so only one of these might get displayed. If you use the overlay rotaries only the adjusted parameter should jump to the top of the list.

For most parameters in plugins however this should as expected, you simply click the slider/control you want to modify/macro/adjust and it jumps to the top.

Thanks again!

[Robert Randolph]

Part 3 is live.

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... art-3.html

Thanks for the update!

One small note that you may have overlooked here is:

I would like if you could turn on the macro parameter assignment, then move a control on the plugin GUI to trigger selection. However I’m quite happy with how Macro Parameters are implemented regardless.

This should work. If you open the plugin UI and move a control, it will jump to the top of the list, just below the search box (it has a slightly darker background).

You might not be seeing the parameter you expect if you're using a multi-parameter control from the UI e.g. the EQ handles control freq and gain so only one of these might get displayed. If you use the overlay rotaries only the adjusted parameter should jump to the top of the list.

For most parameters in plugins however this should as expected, you simply click the slider/control you want to modify/macro/adjust and it jumps to the top.

Thanks again!

I see. I totally missed this, and I will update the post. This is a neat design (EDIT: updated. Thank you for the correction!)

Another issue I had was that I often was trying to use native plugins that display in the lower panel. When you use these plugins it jumps to that panel and you lose the macro parameters window.

[Robert Randolph]

Part 4 is live -

http://admiralbumblebee.com/music/2018/ ... art-4.html

[Trancit]

Hi Robert (and the others following your thread), firstly a huge thank you for such a detailed, informative and fair look at Waveform 9.

I read today the first 2 pages of this review and my impression tbh is a bit different...

I find this review is heavily highlighting the negative side...
Even if you are talking about the "Good" imho, you mention everything positive and outstanding in a more than neutral manner while in your opinion bad aspects are said in a way, that it´s really unforgetable...

I stopped reading after "Mixing-the bad"... I didn´t want to ruin my day...

If your mission is to stop every potential Waveform customer from trying out a really outstanding product... than I have to say: Well done!!!
I´ve never read that amount of negative critism in a single review.

Edit: I am sorry to say this in all clearness... but that´s how I felt after reading... I don´t want to disrespect your efforts though...