Jump to content

Piotr

Members
  • Content Count

    1,104
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Piotr last won the day on January 1 2020

Piotr had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,225 Excellent

1 Follower

About Piotr

  • Birthday February 23

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Well. while it looks like it has lots of interesting possibilities to shape after watching video demo I was very disappointed. Very little musical examples, lots of strange results more suitable for experiments than music. Most of them sounds like I never want to use... 🤔 Anyone tested it in more musical context? Not just sculpting things maybe not possible for other delays but the question is if it means usable in longer terms?
  2. Very challenging thing to implement. I wish it worked like we would like to but I doubt it could be than in this way. It would be better to implement DAW with special client/server architecture. And to be honest I am little surprised nobody is working on that.
  3. Yup, if they are convinced it is so good, why not to create additional product with cabs. Not lots of work they needed to build with ready blocks and additional market for them. IR loaders which just loading IR are painful and require lot of effort. But GUI cabs with moveable mics are where engine is selecting and adjusting IR itself according to GUI is different animal in use. Since I started to use WoS I just cannot imaging going back to regular IR loader and dyeing with hours moving through dirs with hundreds/thousands IRs
  4. My friendly advise about plugins from those guys. Never buy them in blind just after looking some videos on net. Unless you personally tested or absolutely convinced you want them just skip... AFAIK they're still not providing any demo. And there is a good reason for that. I bought a few years ago their amp sim (Jason Richardson - in blind as no demo - just after watching demo video). And in fact almost (?) every of my other amp sims (which I have plenty) is better about sound and usability (at least for my guitars /Ibanez +Strat-Tele hybrid/). It is usable but not giving anything special. But of course Jason playing with it (or in fact anything else) can impress heavily. The true about video demo is great guitar player can sound very good even using am sim from Cakewalk Sonar 2.0 with some cabs. And if he adds some warm words we are ready to buy... But it would be even forgivable if not their completely lack of support. After 1 year I was not even able to load what I buy if I would like to reinstall. Not mentioning any version updates. There are zylion of zylions great plugins so I would like market force them to start respect their own customers or disappear...
  5. Guys, iLok seems to be required for their products which are Chinese instruments only (native to their own market). So no rule new product will get iLOK but only Chinese one.
  6. In this topic, while of of course I appreciate combo all-in-1 solutions, let's not to forget about possibilities like building own dedicated processors using tools like Waves StudioRack or KiloHertz SneapHeat etc... We can just build our own design using building block as we want... More open and flexible although of course it can be much more expensive if one has no plugins of given manufacturer...
  7. The page is ready and trial available now
  8. Yup. And actually that marketing illness destroys workflow and experience. It is not just obvious lie. What next that guy can 'invent' ? Separate amps for treble and bass, different tubes, resistors? Even more numbers for marketing like 'there is over 1 million simulation in new TH-X version...' 😕 How it was even possible to convince product manager or developers to such decision. The only person that can be tricked in such primitive way would be people who have never see any guitar amps in real...
  9. Yup. In fact there are tens things which should be improved and I would love to share with them but forcing fb platform?? Maybe this is another brilliant idea of that marketing 'genius' who encouraged developers to artificially split amp sims to few different instances (like separate amp sim is for every real amp channel starting with TH3? just to lies people they have bigger number of amps simulated ) Oh boy...
  10. I admire your optimistic approach. I am pretty skeptical though. Cakewalk was musical company and Gibson was musical company and we remembered what happened. Also acquiring by Ronald before was disaster. Ronald left Cakewalk and dedicated hardware users alone... I still have 2 hardware pieces from those days. VStudio-20 & A300Pro. Users abandoned. No will to develop or even support for Win10 (VS ). Rather bitter experience. And I could recall how big hopes I had those days just because it was famous music company...
  11. We are just at the begging of the year so wait for it 😛
  12. Their politics was previously: but maybe in your case if you didn't buy anything earlier than 2 months ago it didn't start to apply.
  13. hm, I still didn't get my new long awaited $25 voucher After a year of penalty with $50 anti-voucher I hoped for better time at PA shop... But well ... My last 12 months spending were ways over $50 so I expected $25 voucher would be granted Anybody with similar experience?
  14. Let me answer to this with quoting of part of MIDI 2.0 specification: 1.1 Reliance Upon Other Specifications Implementers should understand that this Specification is not a stand-alone document, in the following regards: • The UMP Format sections describe a transport-independent payload format, not necessarily the low-level data format that will actually be used “on the wire” or “over the air” for any particular standardized transport (such as USB, UDP, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, etc.). MMA/AMEI expect that for every standardized transport that uses the UMP Format, a separate specification will exist to define how to carry UMP payload data for that standardized transport. See also Section 2.1.1.1
  15. hm, why you are assuming usb only ? I think it is different, higher layer of protocol independent on more physical layers...
×
×
  • Create New...