Subject:Sharing plugin chainer??

Posted by: Arnar

Date:11/4/2003 9:18:20 AM

where is the "Share plugin chainer" function?
Has it been taken out?

Wouldnt surprise me if it would have been taken out as it might be used a sort of manual batch converter and we wouldnt want that now would we.
Its funny as i was planning on buying the Batch converter just a few moments ago .....im not going to now , purely for protest reasons..:)
Thats a great idea to actually slow down your work in order to sell you another product.

Or maybe im wrong and i just cant find it.?

Subject:RE: Sharing plugin chainer??

Reply by: Sonic

Date:11/4/2003 12:02:17 PM

It was removed due to a number of behavioral issues related to undo ownership and automation (6.0 had neither capability in the chainer). Examples: If the chainer is shared and you change something, does every window inherit the undo? If you open a new window, does it inherit all the current chainer undos and automatically appear modified? Should envelope edits get broadcast and scaled for all open windows or should they be left alone?

All potentially solveable, but each path creates behavioral fallout that is sometimes desirable and sometimes not. The appropriate thing to do now would be to save common packages and bring them up in the chainer when you want them. Slightly more effort, but I'd hope the additional functionality is worth it.

If that extra click is asking too much, you can look for an internal pref called "Chain per datawnd" and set it to FALSE. In this case, you'll get 6.0-ish shared behavior. Chainer operations will not create undos and, of course, you use it at your own risk.

J.

Subject:RE: Sharing plugin chainer??

Reply by: Arnar

Date:11/4/2003 1:45:05 PM

Ahhh...the envelope tool sounds like a problem to deal with...ok i see.

Well the extra click isnt really asking too much , its just the whole preset behaviour that makes it hard.
You add a plugin and the name of the preset is gone ?

It´s hard to update presets if you cant recall the name exactly ....
It an hassle really..

You should be able to to mess with the preset and add /delete plugins and it would just make a small star or something next to the name so that you see that you have changed it.

Since we are on that subject ...

Can i put my presets in folders?
Can i delete a preset?
Is there any way to have control of all the presets somehow.

Anyhow i guess i will have to buy the batch converter

Subject:RE: Sharing plugin chainer??

Reply by: Sonic

Date:11/4/2003 1:49:29 PM

The 'changed preset' thing is a known issue has been taken under advisement.

You can organize your chains in the plug-in manager window in Sound Forge and import or export to file with the include Preset Manager application.

J.

Subject:RE: Sharing plugin chainer??

Reply by: CDM

Date:11/4/2003 2:00:07 PM

thank you for bringing up the preset issue, Anar. I've been fighting for revisions in this behavior f ro a long time. I really hope we see it soon.

cdm

Subject:RE: Sharing plugin chainer??

Reply by: sk

Date:11/4/2003 2:09:06 PM

Sonic, when you say "internal pref", are you talking about a registry entry? If so, then I think I finally understand what you were referring to in my thread dealing with an apparent problem with 8.3/long file name file naming/accessing. If indeed you are referring to a registry entry, could you please provide me with the general path where I could check that/those out. Thanks.

sk

Subject:RE: Sharing plugin chainer??

Reply by: Sonic

Date:11/4/2003 2:20:09 PM

When I say internal pref, I mean those on the "Internal" preference tab available if you hold down Ctrl+Shift while selecting Options->Preferences. We'll occasionally tell users to try modifying one of these if we think it necessary to solve a problem, but they are hidden for good reason, so I'd strongly advise against poking around in there on your own. All user preferences are stored in the registry, but that's an implementation detail and beside the point.

The pref I was referring to is the 8.3 filename generation in Windows, as detailed in this post. It's more related to a MS limitation of the rundll executable, but might help with this issue as well. Then again, I kinda doubt it now that I think about it.

J.