Studio One Pro Update Releases?

[Vocalpoint]

It would require the file format to never change - or to be designed for this kind of capability from the start, which is extremely complex and ultimately unjustifiable.

Exactly.

A frozen file format makes no sense on a whole bunch of levels - the primary one being no chance of any enhancement - ever.

VP

 

[OneBass]

Making "forward compatibility" a reality would likely stunt any future enhancement to the .song format and put the majority of the user base (like me) in a position where we would need to bear the brunt of a static locked file format - in favor of a minority who needs "forward compatibility".

VP

I agree.
Stunting future enhancements in the name of forward compatibility is not a good idea.
Backward compatibility is a must in my opinion.

 

[ianaeillo]

Ian,

Respectfully - I was not responding to you - specifically. Nor did I read your use case - my apologies.

I agree - exchanging projects with actual clients is a great use case but it is one that Presonus - who decided the entire concept of Workspaces was a good idea - should be responsible to address.

That said - since Presonus (if anyone) should be keenly aware of challenges posed with Workspaces due to project compatibility - I do find it telling that they seem to only ever allow only "backward" compatibility.

I suspect this concept of opening a v7 project - byte for byte - in v5 - borders on a technical impossibility rather than a "non-willingness" to accommodate users such as yourself.

Making "forward compatibility" a reality would likely stunt any future enhancement to the .song format and put the majority of the user base (like me) in a position where we would need to bear the brunt of a static locked file format - in favor of a minority who needs "forward compatibility".

VP

All good! Didn’t mean to sound pushy. Just got the notification you had responded but now am realizing you were to someone else!

 

[Stuart Welwood]

MIDI

There's a lot that I like about S1, but I'm disappointed by the lack of MIDI support. Some suggestions for easy to code improvements:

1. MIDI Event List - with filtering by port, channel, and message type and in-cell editing
2. MIDI Event Viewer - add filtering by port and channel to the existing viewer
3. SysEx send and receive - with auto send option upon song open
4. MIDI Search - by MIDI message type... Something like this:

 

[Lukas]

Some suggestions for easy to code improvements

Respectfully, only the dev team can judge what's easy to implement. For instance, MIDI channel filtering isn't possible with the current architecture, since tracks only support a single MIDI channel and note/automation data doesn't carry MIDI channel info. SysEx editing isn't supported at all. These are valid feature requests, but far from "easy".

 

[apessino]

MIDI

There's a lot that I like about S1, but I'm disappointed by the lack of MIDI support. Some suggestions for easy to code improvements:

1. MIDI Event List - with filtering by port, channel, and message type and in-cell editing
2. MIDI Event Viewer - add filtering by port and channel to the existing viewer
3. SysEx send and receive - with auto send option upon song open
4. MIDI Search - by MIDI message type... Something like this:

View attachment 986

Not sure if serious... but that dialog is pure nightmare fuel. It looks straight from the Cakewalk school of horrors - some of the worst UX ever inflicted on our species.

 

[madFloyd]

MIDI

There's a lot that I like about S1, but I'm disappointed by the lack of MIDI support. Some suggestions for easy to code improvements:

1. MIDI Event List - with filtering by port, channel, and message type and in-cell editing
2. MIDI Event Viewer - add filtering by port and channel to the existing viewer
3. SysEx send and receive - with auto send option upon song open
4. MIDI Search - by MIDI message type... Something like this:

View attachment 986

Why would you want this?

 

[ianaeillo]

SysEx would be nice but I can’t imagine why they’d put devs on it. My job would be easier with Sysex but I also get why they’d spend their time with more pressing issues. The rest you can get with MidiPipe, which does *everything* I could ever want.

 

[Craig Anderton]

I would find a MIDI Event List helpful. But being able to see MIDI Events for an individual track would do 95% of what I would need from an Event List.

As to sys ex, MIDI 2.0's bidirectional communication means the type of data transfers done by sys ex would no longer require user intervention. I've seen demos, but who knows how long it will be before these types of features are fully implemented. Regardless, I don't think there's much reason for PreSonus to go all-out on MIDI updates until MIDI 2.0 hooks are in final Windows builds, as expected later this year (they're already in macOS, and in the Windows preview builds).

Respectfully, only the dev team can judge what's easy to implement.

Absolutely! For example, you'd think it would be easy for Ableton Live to record solo button presses when recording a live performance. But apparently, it's very difficult because Solo was intended as a diagnostic tool, not something you would use in live performance.

On the other hand, sometimes I've been hesitant to make a feature request because I thought it would be really complicated. But then the next day I had a version to test.

 

[SuperSix]

I hope they give us a better solution to rendering tracks with all their busses than the rendering stems option. I tried Gregor's macro but it just doesn't work the way I would like.

 

[Stuart Welwood]

Respectfully, only the dev team can judge what's easy to implement. For instance, MIDI channel filtering isn't possible with the current architecture, since tracks only support a single MIDI channel and note/automation data doesn't carry MIDI channel info. SysEx editing isn't supported at all. These are valid feature requests, but far from "easy".

First, thank you all for your replies, all of which make good points. I will attempt to take them one at a time.

Lukas, you are clearly correct in your reply to my flippant use of the word easy. In general, only the developers can assess whether a certain task is easy, however that is defined, such as developer hours, project coordination, etc.

In the case of the filtering of the MIDI Event Viewer's contents, however, I can say with high confidence that the solution is relatively easy. It could be done all in the interface. The data is already there:

The controls to select the port and channel can go on the right. Add an if/then statement to do the filtering. Done. Am I missing something?

 

[Lukas]

The controls to select the port and channel can go on the right. Add an if/then statement to do the filtering. Done. Am I missing something?

Yes, right. You hadn't used the term "MIDI Monitor", so I didn't realize you were referring to this window.

 

[Stuart Welwood]

Not sure if serious... but that dialog is pure nightmare fuel. It looks straight from the Cakewalk school of horrors - some of the worst UX ever inflicted on our species.

Isn't that one ugly dialog? I retired a few years ago from decades of working as a software engineer, including the role of lead interface designer/developer ("GUI Czar"), and it reminds me of a custom project that I worked on for a big health insurance company. The main interface had some tabs, with one so crammed with controls that they were not drawing in the desired order. Three developers had tried to fix it. So it was left to me. I used system functions (PEEK and POKE) to rearrange the Windows messages in the application's message queue and put the code in a system hook function. It worked.

To your point, though, I have used this ugly thing many times through the years to help solve MIDI orchestration problems. CW reused the dialog for other purposes, including interpolation.

Kudos to the Studio One team for bringing us such a fun interface to use. Looks great, too.

 

[Stuart Welwood]

Yes, right. You hadn't used the term "MIDI Monitor", so I didn't realize you were referring to this window.

I probably used the Cakewalk name. It may take some time to get that program out of my system.

 

[Stuart Welwood]

Why would you want this?

A good question. Here's an example.

Troubleshooting by Elimination - Sometimes a MIDI file dragged into an empty track will contain a troublesome continuous controller (CC). It may cause a stuck note or affect another CCs behavior, such as changing vibrato from time based to tempo based. If a MIDI Event Viewer were available, then only CC events could be shown without having to guess which CC numbers are being used, set up the part automation to see them, and visually scanning the track, as is currently the case, as far as I can tell. I feel like I'm flying blind.

 

[Stuart Welwood]

SysEx would be nice but I can’t imagine why they’d put devs on it. My job would be easier with Sysex but I also get why they’d spend their time with more pressing issues. The rest you can get with MidiPipe, which does *everything* I could ever want.

It looks like MidiPipe is Mac only. I have a new PC with a couple of versions of Cakewalk that can each do the job as a manual workaround. With this addition, though, I could be certain to have the required SysEx files loaded up into my synths just after a song loads into S1.

As for the cost, it's admittedly a low importance addition, given that there are workarounds. However, as part of a combination of MIDI support measures, it could improve S1's reputation among many MIDI users. Restricted to simply sending and receiving SysEx dumps, e.g., no dump request macros, it's low hanging fruit. The minimal feature set would be easy to spell out. Should anyone wish to pursue it, just let me know.

 

[Stuart Welwood]

I would find a MIDI Event List helpful. But being able to see MIDI Events for an individual track would do 95% of what I would need from an Event List.

Yes, I agree. When it comes to the MIDI events in a track, I feel like they are partly invisible. Seeing them would be a big help.

P.S. I still have your 1975 book "Electronic Projects for Musicians" on my shelf. Remember sound sheets? We've come a long way.

 

[sintil8]

Hi

Didn’t Presonus say they were going to roll out 4 major updates per year?

Considering it’s April and we are on version 7.1 that gives Presonus only 8 months to release 3 new major updates….

Sticking my neck out a bit, but with the best of intentions...

It's almost a year since SO 1 ver 7 was released and it will soon be time to look at those subscription renewals.

Myself, am hoping an announcement will be forthcoming of a major update or on the other hand will the subscription to Pro+ be an empty vessel that Presonus launched.
If no major update is announced is the Pro+ subscription renewal worth it?

Regards to all.

 

[Vocalpoint]

It's almost a year since SO 1 ver 7 was released and it will soon be time to look at those subscription renewals.

Myself, am hoping an announcement will be forthcoming of a major update or on the other hand will the subscription to Pro+ be an empty vessel that Presonus launched. If no major update is announced is the Pro+ subscription renewal worth it?

Pretty certain this is not the place to get into unknown update info or what to do (or not do) about your sub.

That said - each of us will need to decide what is important to us as we head into October (and beyond).

No one can really tell you what represents "value" to you.

Finally - Presonus never pre-announces anything so if you are hoping for any sort of window into the future - you won't get that here.

VP

 

[sintil8]

Pretty certain this is not the place to get into unknown update info or what to do (or not do) about your sub.

That said - each of us will need to decide what is important to us as we head into October (and beyond).

No one can really tell you what represents "value" to you.

Finally - Presonus never pre-announces anything so if you are hoping for any sort of window into the future - you won't get that here.

VP

I fully agree, it just crossed my mind that nothing has been announced and wonder if something will be.

I already have value with SO 1 as is, but curiosity is part of my nature and as the first year is coming to a close do wonder how Presonus will keep the Pro+ advantage alive.

Best of regards