traverso-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Traverso-devel] some observations


From: Remon Sijrier
Subject: Re: [Traverso-devel] some observations
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 20:55:01 +0100
User-agent: KMail/1.9.10

Hi,

> i've been playing with the latest cvs here, and was intending to
> migrate an album project to traverso, just to see how far we can push
> things in terms of productivity -- trying to do real work is a great
> way to discover stuff about a piece of software. unfortunately, i
> quickly ran into some stumbling blocks, some of which are fatal for
> the way i work.

Thanks a lot for working this way with Traverso, it's indeed a valuable way to 
discover shortcomings of a piece of software.

>
> here are my findings:
>
> *** lack of internal busses
> *** lack of sends
> *** lack of inserts
> *** internal connections not exposed to jack
>
> these all relate to my need to run convolution reverb (using
> jconv). there is currently no way to route tracks to external
> processes, like jconv, except through the master output bus, and no
> way to return signals to tracks within traverso except through the
> hardware i/o. this could be remedied by simply exposing ins/outs to
> jack not only at the master bus level, but also for each track. that
> way, we could use an empty track as a bus and/or we could send/return
> signals arbitrarily to external jack processes.
>
> or am i missing something?

We're aware of the need for routing support, it's on the TODO list :-)
Certain plugins are planned to be included by default, one of my favorites 
would be jconv integration ;-)


> *** lack of track automation
>
> we have gain envelopes for clips, but we cannot automate gain or pan
> at the track level. this means that if i have some clips with gain
> envelopes in a track and i want to fade over the duration of all the
> clips, there's no way to do it except to try to adjust all the gain
> envelopes progressively lower. yes, we do have per-clip global gain,
> independant of the envelope (which is very nice), but it is still
> difficult to implement gain changes which span clips or don't correspond to
> clip boundaries.

True, it's a matter of adding the graphics part of gain/pan envelopes for 
Track, as it is technically possible allready, which in turn needs some 
investigation on how and when to show this information to the user.

> *** lack of track gain grouping
>
> say we have a group of instruments balanced against each other, and we
> want to change the level *as a group*. this requires either track
> grouping or routing through a submix bus, neither of which currently exist.

Nicola: please don't cry ;-)

> *** lack of plugin automation
> *** can't choose pre/post fader for plugins
>
> *** rubberband-box clip selection
>
> it is currently very tedious to select large numbers of clips for a group.

<< S >> selects all clips.
After reading some suggestions in the bug tracker I think it might end up like 
this:

< S > or < left mouse button > : (de)select clip
<< S >> : (de)select all clips in pointed track
CTRL+ < A > (de)select all clips in Sheet
[ S ] : rubber band selection.

(Request for comments please on the above proposal)

> *** split across all selected clips
> *** drag ends of all selected clips
>
> any plans to implement other functions besides move and delete, for
> clip groups?

Copy also is there, what about changing the Gain of all clips at once, do you 
have other things in mind?
Drag clip ends is a good one I think, split as well.
Can you please add these to the bugtracker ?

> anyways, the improvements already implemented recently are a huge step
> forward, so i don't mean to be negative! i just found that, when it
> came down to doing actual work on a project, i couldn't yet do it in
> traverso.

Of course not, it's just great you tried it out, and the feedback is hugely 
appreciated! 
We're aware of most of your findings, but it's good to be reminded, and to 
know what people are still missing to make Traverso a real alternative to 
others.
Routing is obviously a big one that's missing, and also a problematic one to 
implement right.

>
> cheers... and keep up the great work!

Thanks, 

Remon




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]