Jump to content

Studio One is about to get the Shaft


Larry Shelby

Recommended Posts

Full interview, he says it’s not about to change at the pro level, just a more accessible entry point:

‘Question:  Would this accessible software be based on the Studio One platform?

Note the wording implies that it would not be Studio One, but something different.

"Yes, I think for that with Fender one of the things I think we did well over the last few years is to create easily explainable platforms; where you can go from Squier Affinity to Mexican-made Fender Player to American Pro to Ultra. People understand what they're getting at each level and why they're paying a step up in price. I think what we need with Studio is the same thing. Which is there's a very simple, free, freely accessible product, then levels above that until eventually you get to the pro level, that’s easier said than done.’

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Yan Filiatrault said:

Maybe with a source, it would bring more nuance:

‘Whether this theoretical product would replace Studio One or sit alongside it remains to be seen but, given what Mooney has in mind, we suspect it would be the latter.’

https://www.musicradar.com/news/fender-daw-presonus-studio-one-future

I went back to find the source, but couldn't find it...so just posted.  Sorry about that...
but I think that he wants to "cheapen" Studio One, so from what I understand "REMOVE" features
and make it cheaper means just that.  Only time will will tell.  But THIS is the very first statement
in the article

“I think you need to take away more features, make it simpler and more intuitive and less expensive”

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, cclarry said:

I went back to find the source, but couldn't find it...so just posted.  Sorry about that...
but I think that he wants to "cheapen" Studio One, so from what I understand "REMOVE" features
and make it cheaper means just that.  Only time will will tell.  But THIS is the very first statement
in the article

“I think you need to take away more features, make it simpler and more intuitive and less expensive”

 

 

That’s ok, some articles quotes are misleading. When you read the full interview, it’s clear that he wants to create a simpler entry point,  to attract more musicians towards the pro version and to their hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Yan Filiatrault said:

That’s ok, some articles quotes are misleading. When you read the full interview, it’s clear that he wants to create a simpler entry point,  to attract more musicians towards the pro version and to their hardware.

THIS is his KEY statement that you all seem to be AVOIDING:

"Whether this theoretical product would replace Studio One or sit alongside it remains to be seen but, given what Mooney has in mind, we suspect it would be the latter."

So they are GUESSING that it's the latter...but it STILL remains to be seen!

Edited by cclarry
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes because obviously guitars are analogous to software. So as Squires are made in Bangladesh or wherever, from inferior and cheaper components, so too will this new Studio One Simple be compiled with cheap inferior code written by inexperienced 13 yr olds in some third world programming sweatshop.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, cclarry said:

THIS is his KEY statement that you all seem to be AVOIDING:

"Whether this theoretical product would replace Studio One or sit alongside it remains to be seen but, given what Mooney has in mind, we suspect it would be the latter."

So they are GUESSING that it's the latter...but it STILL remains to be seen!

When you read the the full interview, it makes for a better understanding that avoid speculation 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Yan Filiatrault said:

When you read the the full interview, it makes for a better understanding that avoid speculation 

I guess that's how you interpret it, as is your prerogative, but that statement seems pretty "iffy",
and I DID read the entire article.  Business people are "Politicians" for money.  They say LOTS of things.
For instance "Lifetime Updates for Sonar Professional", and THEN the company goes belly up!
Had it not been for Bandlab we ALL would have basically been played for fools (which we were!) and had to move on!

Like I said before, when Cakewalk said "LIFETIME UPDATES" they meant the lifetime of the COMPANY - not OURS!
So technically they didn't "Lie" per se,  they just played POLITICS!

We can go back and forth all day....BOTTOM LINE....IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN....just like the article said!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, cclarry said:

THIS is his KEY statement that you all seem to be AVOIDING:

"Whether this theoretical product would replace Studio One or sit alongside it remains to be seen but, given what Mooney has in mind, we suspect it would be the latter."

So they are GUESSING that it's the latter...but it STILL remains to be seen!

It's pure speculation by a journalist and even they are speculating that a simpler version would exist as a new tier.
You are the one person that is making a deal out of this and I haven't avoided it but called you on it.
You are the sensationalist here, nothing to see as far as I can tell.
If anything, extending Studio One downwards is more likely to help the product range if they get the branding right.

 

Edited by Technostica
  • Haha 1
  • Meh 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a feeling that the majority of music software users are NOT musicians. If you look at the changes taking place in all the major titles they all veer towards the non-musician...loop browsers, EZ this EZ that, AI, blah blah blah. The main reason I jumped ship from Cakewalk to Cubase was just this...but it's starting to affect all music software. Hopefully all that will come of this is an idiot version of Studio One for those not interested in learning anything about music in the first place!

Bill

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Technostica said:

It's pure speculation by a journalist and even they are speculating that a simpler version would exist as a new tier.
You are the one person that is making a deal out of this and I haven't avoided it but called you on it.
You are the sensationalist here, nothing to see as far as I can tell.
If anything, extending Studio One downwards is more likely to help the product range if they get the branding right.

 

They already have PRIME - the FREE Version, AND they have ARTIST, the scaled down version.  What am I missing?
Why didn't he just say "We're going to work on a new product" rather than say "we need to REMOVE features, make
it simpler, and more affordable"?  The very WORDS imply that it will be "Studio One", whether DERIVED or REPLACED!

I'm not GUESSING...I'm just stating EXACTLY what the article said.  Apparently THAT is "sensationalizing" I guess.
Sorry if it all this gets you riled up.  I'm just stating facts!  I don't live in "LA LA LAND", I read, analyze, and draw logical
conclusions....that being said...NONE OF US REALLY KNOWS....because AGAIN....it REMAINS TO BE SEEN!

I am NOT sensationalizing anything whatsoever...merely stating facts.  If that bothers you I can't help that...sorry!

  • Like 1
  • Great Idea 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Best case scenario, There's a Lite version on the way. Like Home Studio was to Sonar.

Worst case, they actually take away features. Which sounds crazy but I've seen this happen before. Recycle, UVI Player, recently Battery and Kontakt to a lesser degree. I hate when companies take away feature and call it an update. They actually put a couple back in Kontakt because users complained so loudly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...