|
Subject:how far off 3.0 d
Posted by: PHATDRUMS
Date:12/3/2001 4:21:43 PM
cause 3c aint working just yet, i still think there are plugin problems even in demo versions as well as rendering issues for a number of people solo problems muting problems (time outs on both) so how far off is 3d |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Maruuk
Date:12/3/2001 8:52:45 PM
Don't hold your breath on this one. Let's hope they jump straight to 4.0 and a DXi/VST/ReWire standard. If they do, they'll bundle some very cool plugins--synths, sampler, EFX extras, etc. Of course, none of the Acid die-hards around here need any of that stuff. But the rest of the 1.2 million-user worldwide market that buys the competitors' Acid-compatible products has spoken with their wallets. Sooner or later SF must listen to these folks or Acid will become the Dreamcast of loop apps, if it hasn't already. |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: PHATDRUMS
Date:12/4/2001 2:29:37 AM
i totally agree with that 3.0 is just an amalgamation of vegas and acid 2 with a little midi thrown in (laughable at best) but i dont need video in my music but i do need synths better real time control on fx but most of all i just want it to work! i could run 2 on a low power laptop all fx blazing lots of envelopes etc yet i struggle doing tests of songs on v3.0 with a 2 gig processor and a gig of ram a im totally at a loss as are friends who have spent many wasted hours trying to make the thing work , so how long for 3d better still a fully modern up to date 4? |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Maruuk
Date:12/4/2001 3:05:21 AM
PHAT--Right on! According to the SF Acid attack dog gang, guys like you don't exist! Nobody is supposed to need a synth, or plugin standards, or (dare I say it) actual audio tracks--never mind it actually working. Welcome to the silent majority that needs Acid to become a modern, practical, vertically integrated tool that just plain works. |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: MacMoney
Date:12/4/2001 7:55:12 AM
Guys You are not alone. I too would love to see better midi DXi and VST Synth plugins FX automation. THE ONLY WAY, THE ONLY WAY! to get what you want from SF is to keep asking. If not get ready for Acid Video 4! George Ware |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Maruuk
Date:12/4/2001 12:14:32 PM
Wow, nice to know I'm not alone out here gang! I think SF will do it, and reasonably soon. They're about the lone holdout on adopting standards and bundling useful synth and other plugins. It's long overdue, but 4.0 must be the rev they come into the fold and integrate/bundle/standardize. On the bug issue, 3.0c can be ugly. And the whole audio and midi issue is so constricted, screwed up, and riddled with misinformation it's not even worth talking about. An Acid 4.0 Manifesto: 1) Reduce bugs! 2) At least some standards adoption (DXi/ReWire/VST) 3) Bundle a synth, sampler and automatable EFX 4) Full midi support with piano roll editing 5) Full audio support--we can live with one stereo record track at a time, but must have full "unlimited" (limited only by hardware like Vegas) multitrack audio Now, this seems like a lot, until you start looking around at Acid-compatible products 1/10 the cost of Acid (incredible, yet true) and they have all of the above, and more. We can only hope that the reason Acid 3.0c is so screwed up is because all the SF resources are allocated to making the above a reality, and soon. If not, Acid will join Betamax, the Edsel, Dreamcast and the Amiga as great ideas whose time has come and gone. |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: PHATDRUMS
Date:12/4/2001 1:16:31 PM
i didnt start this off as an anti acid post just vent mine and other feelings about the poor implimentation of v3.0 i hope your right that it may be a stop gap move i somehow doubt it though, sound forge 5 is a regressive program just look at sf own comparison charts apart from fx (which many users have anyway) and the wonderful ogg vorbis (yeah rightill get a lot of use out of that )theres less than 4.5 and you need to keep that on board to use cd architect (great program) i just cant believe the con of combining acid and vegas with minor skin differences (both now a couple of years down the line)and selling it back without adding new features such realtime fx and the soft synth revolution especially with processor speeds being what they are and ram prices falling through the floor ? perhaps they thought nobody has been looking at other apps and their advances. still i still wish 3.0 would work i have to use logic (full automation on fx)or cubase depending who i am programming for midi, as i do not use pre made loops and then transfer between appz this is time consuming an in a studio that means exspensive the midi in v3 is so poor people have laughed out loud when ive been spotted using it, what about control info, good editing etc it says pro on the label does it not if these things were added i wouldnt need to run other progs as it is im beginning to use it just to time loops forget about anything else which sad as other have said to me it nothing more to them than a timstretch plugin which doesnt bode well really ! sorry about the rant i hope it gets sorted |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Iacobus
Date:12/4/2001 1:38:44 PM
I was told 3.0d would be around mid-December. Quite frankly, I don't see what the hubbub is all about as far as getting synths and such into ACID is about, but hey, what do I know... Like MacMoney said, if you want to see something in ACID, PLEASE ASK. Iacobus |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: SHTUNOT
Date:12/4/2001 3:36:14 PM
The one thing that I'm rooting for is integration of acid into Vegas Audio!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I know,I know, it would probably hurt the sales of this program and piss off alot of users...but when you look at cakewalks Sonar, You see that they have set a standard that SoFo has to meet and beat to survive. Look at all the features AND acid compatibility in the same program! Crap!! And I believe that programs like cubase will have better integration with their recycle product line in the next release because thanks to Acid and Sonar cubase users are drooling for it now. I don't really like the acid type features in sonar...but its the first of its kind and can only get better. I could viably see acid and Vegas taking a little brother,big brother type relationship.Standard midi,DX automation,Vst,BLAH,BLAH,BLAH.Maybe give it a stable 8 or 16 tracks of recorded audio[NOT LOOPS] so that people won't cry about there stuff not syncing...they'll have a definable limit... You want more...buy Vegas Audio. No need for vegas le at all now[uhhhh...unless you are checking out the video editing features :)]. Back to work...Later. |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: PHATDRUMS
Date:12/5/2001 5:30:21 AM
iacobus the hubbub as you refer to it and the point of my initial post was the fact that the program does simply not work for many of us i am an acid user i like and luv v2 and i would learn to luv v3 if and when it works, your flippancy is not constructive after all if you bought a car and it looked nice in the garage but didnt work would you complain? why the hubbub it still looks nice! me;id like to drive it many thanks |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Iacobus
Date:12/5/2001 7:07:11 AM
What if, in your case, it isn't the software? Could it be your hardware? The way your system is configured? There are so many possible factors... Let's compare systems: 800 MHz Pentium III, 384 MB PC133 SDRAM, 45 GB 7200 RPM hard drive, 12x DVD-ROM, 8x8x24 CD-RW, M-Audio Audiophile 2496. Using Windows 98 SE. I have minimal programs installed—only the ones I absolutely need. Nothing runs in the background except Explorer and Systray. My system is configured optimally as a DAW (digital audio workstation). By default, Windows is not configured for such an environment. You're bound to get some more performance out of your system with the link above for that purpose. Also, weekly maintenance is also done (ScanDisk and Disk Defragmenter). I'm just trying to say that I personally haven't had a major problem with ACID Pro 3, probably because I took precaution. Sure, I've had the niggling bug or two that eventually got squashed out with updates but nothing life-stopping. Iacobus |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Rockitglider
Date:12/5/2001 7:10:37 AM
Hello, Why don't you people who aren't able to use Acid 3.0 post your problems and system config, and see if we can together come up with a solution to get your program working for you. Rockit |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Iacobus
Date:12/5/2001 7:25:50 AM
There's also a great PDF (Acrobat) guide here. NOTE: Right-click and use, "Save Target As." Iacobus |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: PHATDRUMS
Date:12/5/2001 9:14:08 AM
hi again i have 2gig processor i gig pc133 ram 24x burner 40 gig ultra wide scsci drive (for audio only) motu 24 I/0 CARD IVE HAVE TRIED EVERYTHING FOUND IN THESE FORUMS AND MORE, FRIENDS HAVE THE SAME ISSUES WITH DIFFERENT SETUPS BUT THE SAME PROBS MAYBE 3D WILL SORT IT THERE IS NO INTERNET ON MY MACHINE AND NOTHING ELSE RUNS IN THE BACKGROUND EVER! IT IS PURELY FOR MAKING MUSIC WHICH IT CANNOT DO WITH ACID 3.C ALL I REALLY NEEDED WAS V2 WITH ADDED TRACK FX AND COMPRESSION NOT VIDEO OTHER SF PRODUCTS DEAL NICELY WITH THAT I BELIEVE ME THINKS THE PROB IS FX BASED ANY WAY AND THE WAY ACID 3 SCANS AND DEALS WITH THEM (THATS JUST A GUESS THOUGH) THOUGH I HAVE SAME PROBS JUST USING SF FX INSTEAD OF OTHERS ANYWAY ROLL ON 3 D |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Rockitglider
Date:12/5/2001 11:26:05 AM
Hello again, Are your problems with oneshots,loops,recordings, or effects, and are you using track effects, or assignable effects, or buss effects? Let me know See ya, Rockit |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Iacobus
Date:12/5/2001 1:14:02 PM
Do you have access to an FTP server, PHATDRUMS? I'd like to check out the project to see if it skips/stutters/times out on me (that is, if you don't mind). You'd save the project in ACD-ZIP format. Iacobus |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: PHATDRUMS
Date:12/5/2001 2:51:57 PM
sorry i no acess and the track im working on is is part of an ongoing record company option, the problems occur with other tracks so ill try and find one but it would mean you having all the same plugins etc for it to open correctly |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: PHATDRUMS
Date:12/5/2001 2:53:23 PM
The content of this message was deleted by the owner. |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: Rockitglider
Date:12/5/2001 3:10:46 PM
Hello, Are you using plug-ins from a 3rd party? And how many per chain, and are they track efx, assignable efx, or buss efx? The reason I'm asking is I know a way to make effects work pretty good without skipping and that's with using alot of them, I've had over twenty going at once with no skipping. See ya, Rockit |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: PHATDRUMS
Date:12/5/2001 3:55:51 PM
they are 3rd party normally 1, 2 tops assigned 2 track fx per track i get no skipping but all problems start after the fourth fx page has been assigned its not a memory issue, rendering causes crashes and total reboot but most other problems occur with solo and mute operations and are time out issues that do resolve if the muted track or solo button is clicked off if for instance i open up track made in v2 and in that saved file is a muted track the track will time out until the mute is deleted weird eh yet if i remove all fx from the track everything is fine the snapshot demo plays fine till i add the fx (over 4) the track will still play with out glitching no matter how many fx i add its just i cannot perform mutes or solos to eq effect compress etc thanks |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: MacMoney
Date:12/5/2001 5:50:37 PM
Hi, Have the MOTU-2408 and 1296. Try this, go into your Control Panel>Display>Performance and turn down Hardware Acceleration and see if this helps.I've ran up to 64 track, Oneshots,Loops and Beatmapped and I have no problems. I use Waves,Timeworks,TC Native and SF plugins. I hope this helps George |
|
Subject:RE: how far off 3.0 d
Reply by: photon
Date:12/7/2001 9:38:02 AM
mD, Thanks for the link. |