-
Hi and welcome to the Studio One User Forum!
Please note that this is an independent, user-driven forum and is not endorsed by, affiliated with, or maintained by PreSonus. Learn more in the Welcome thread!
Studio Pro 8 - Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Ari
- Start date
Crossinger
Active member
Crossinger
Yes, it looks like that), and I can’t think of any scenario for using this in real work) it`s broken by design )even with native s1 plugins )which have more than 8 parameters )Even if the parameters were configurable, it would still be pointless, because instead of adjusting the knobs of each plugin and wasting time on it, wouldn't it be easier to open the interface of the same fabfilter and do everything as usual?
Last edited:
Crossinger
Active member
That’s in the eye of the beholder. In the same way I don’t want ALL parameters in the plugin micro view, I also would focus on the most used parameters in the channel overview. What’s the point of cramming all parameters in a tiny panel? If you need full access, then open the plugin UI - simple as that.
Has anyone tried added a Splitter and seeing how it is represented in the Channel Overview
All this leads me to some bad thoughts.
I used to love S1 updates, because all the new features (even the ones I didn't really need) were thought through and tested.
Now it's a clear example of "we need new features, let's make something"—and no one even bothered to test how it would work.
I used to love S1 updates, because all the new features (even the ones I didn't really need) were thought through and tested.
Now it's a clear example of "we need new features, let's make something"—and no one even bothered to test how it would work.
The key flaw is that the most usable parameters aren't necessarily in the first 8 automation slots.
In many plugins, they're even organized alphabetically.
Crossinger
Active member
See my edit above:
BTW: same is possible with micro view.
Crossinger
Active member
That’s a bummer. 
I would expect this feature also for native plugins. (and yes: it’s way too technical and user unfriendly - especially when the plugin reports hundreds of parameters.)
I would expect this feature also for native plugins. (and yes: it’s way too technical and user unfriendly - especially when the plugin reports hundreds of parameters.)
Vocalpoint
Well-known member
"Sharing" is the wrong word. That implies one or more processes are going to the same well to drink
"Copy, parse and create" is more what goes on here. SP8's installer knows exactly where your prior version config data is - grabs it, massages it and injects it into your new install.
At the end of the install - you have a fully recreated "new" config - exclusive for SPv8's usage.
While the prior config remains untouched for continued v7 use.
VP
Yes I remember that and I thought that meant 2 different products and I thought the Fender Studio mobile app was the embodiment of that declaration.
I thought Studio One was similar to ProTools in that it was a standard, professional tool. I did not think that they would touch Studio One and would just make a separate version with a lower learning curve for new markets.
I was wrong, lol.
I know apps have to change but I was hoping to enjoy v7 as it is for a while (with some improvements on it). I know I can just stay on v7 but there won't be any more updates.
I do see where Presonus can go after new markets using Studio One/Fender Studio Pro as an app for live sound (like Lava Studio but I can do everything, guitar, PA mix, etc in Studio One) I am using it live it is a great platform just missing a few things. Doesn't look like they are going that way either?
RRR Studio
New member
EDIT: Please see my follow up later in the thread- Studio Pro 8 has flexibility I did not know of, and has performed flawlessly.
I'll admit it's hard to criticize when they gave me a full license for two years. That said, none of the issues in the previous versions have been addressed, and this is the second update focused on *cosmetic changes and moving stuff around* which SUCKS. Come on guys, quit changing the workflow just for the heck of it!
Cosmetic updates to all the stock plugins. I use mixtool on every single mix. Why in the *world* did they hide the automation indicator??? So you can't see if it's automated at a glance? Was the original design to constrained for space at 2"x4"??
Why is the clip editor button now a tiny "i" in the bottom left corner?? It was in a good place before.
Is it really necessary to change the main workflow when opening plugins? And aren't the micro views literally the same thing as the new "channel overview?" Who uses these?? Mostly my experience with micro views is they get opened too easily already and I end up closing them to clean up the DAW view (in other words totally wasted effort).
Why did they make the faders 3D? The shaded areas make it much more difficult to see the settings, and it's not useful.
Why do we need a 'freeze track' button? You can do the same thing right clicking on the channel header in previous versions (for a handful of times you do this in a mixing session). And now we can't access the automation lines from the stock view because we have a pan controller??
And rearranging the sidebar modules just makes us relearn the software needlessly. A good upgrade would let me toggle the sidebar windows on and off as needed. I don't need an extra fader and plugin list there- I use the entire mixer window on a different screen.
It appears they did get rid of the 'total whiteout' highlight on selected clips. It's still hard to see the transport locator line on some colors, but its better than in v6. But can we also go back to the black clip outlines? The thick white clip outlines make it impossible to edit accurately.
We don't need a generic channel overview, equally ugly and devoid of function as the (nearly identical) track editor. And if you're going to do that, make it so I can tell which plugin is which, because with dozens of plugins on a session squinting at generic gray boxes to see the tiny print around the *knobs* is a literal headache. And why is it that the same symbol on the channel that evokes the track editor is used to denote the link to the actual plugin from the channel overview?
While you're at it, please tell whomever is in charge of the ridiculous cosmetic changes to stop stealing screen real estate for no reason- They're taking nearly 10% of the vertical space on the screen for an empty black header and much thicker 3D function bar?? Oh yeah, the header at the bottom of the screen is thicker too- and 3D because why?? And why the hell did they rearrange the layout??? Do you think anyone on earth is going to use that tiny "master volume" control? We need a "transpose" displayed on the main transport bar?? And why do I need bigger transport controls? I have a DAW controller for that- and if I needed to click on the stop button it was fine before. Stop making backwards "improvements" to the layout. Gotta be honest folks, the appearance of v7 was elegant by comparison. This is clunky and dark and wastes valuable screen real estate that makes me spend more time moving things around while I'm working.
Seriously, I feel like they've got people creating features and making changes that never worked a moment with real audio- which is what Studio One was always great for doing. If I wanted FL STudio with a bunch of amp sims, I could've bought it from them. And does Fender actually expect me to believe they suddenly modeled 47 different guitar amps?? Don't insult my intelligence. I'd be happy with ONE that actually sounds and feels like a Super Reverb. EDIT: Yeah, sorry. Having now tried the "'57 Super Reverb" that has neither reverb nor vibrato, but does have a gain knob?
PS. Super tacky renaming it "Fender." I have a '71 Strat. That's Fender. This monstrosity of a business empire they're bloating into is not Fender and I sure don't want their branding on everything they buy.
Some design enhancement that we need:
1) More group functionality like ProTools. It would be great to edit the settings on all my vocals tracks when editing with Pro Q. The group links options are very limited.
2) 3D matrix you can assign to busses on the output? You can't set up a proper 3D sound field in stereo without 3D routing you can control. Again go see ProTools.
3) Legacy colors option for the edit window without thick while clip borders and total whiteout clip highlight. And the transport marker needs to be high contrast over ALL clips. The old narrow black clip outlines and color schemes were much more useful.
4) freeze mixer order option. Every time I drag a bus over by the channel to write automation, the entire mixer rearranges itself, scattering busses throughout the channels for no reason whatsoever. Alternately it would be nice if only the channel or bus I'm moving decided to grow legs.
5) Eliminate the black dead space at the bottom of the plugin browser with the Presonus logo. A taller plugin browser window would be much better.
6) Shift-precision option while adjusting levels throughout the DAW so you don't have to fight to get the exact value you want? Half the time I end up expanding windows to get more resolution or having to right click, then move the mouse to the pop-up window precisely on the value to type it in. No really, what IF you could actually set it at -.4dB instead of choosing between -.3dB and -.6dB in the clip itself? That's a workflow NEEDING improvement.
7) Is there a reason the order of commands in the channel right-click menu change order all the time? Do I really need to search for the Show/Hide Automation option every time I open it? Top or bottom you choose, just fix the way it changes all the time.
8) In the main view, lots of wasted space on the automation track headers controlling plugin automation. I would be great if they said which plugins they're controlling.
9) Finally, how about making *new features* user options rather than just changing everything for no reason?
Being one to give a fair review, I'll add these pros to my list of cons:
1) The new software installed flawlessly in a flash and works perfectly.
2) The startup sequence and plugin scan are blindingly fast. Sessions load faster too.
3) They did apparently remove the 'whiteout' on clip selection, but the thick white borders still make it hard to edit accurately.
EDIT:
4) After some use, I'll be damned if the mixer faders aren't way smoother. Which is actually really nice work, thanks!
Bottom line? At some point please start working on updates for the people who already own the product rather than changing it hoping to find new subscribers. We've ALREADY invested in your product, so how about making us a bit more of a priority?
Signed a long time Studio One Pro user that's been searching for a relevant upgrade since v5.5.2 and wondering when the cosmetic BS is going to stop making my job harder.
Last edited:
John B
TonalDynamics
Active member
What one might call the "traditional" perspective strongly suggests there need to be elaborate reference manuals; but (a) does anybody actually read them and (b) are they mostly the way technical writers interpret the often abstract information provided by software engineers who as a group tend to speak Jupiterian and have personal caches of plutonium?
(a) I've read my Studio One manual in PDF form for 15 years and is how I learnt half the things I know about the DAW, the other half coming from a combo of support forum posts from the old board (and this one!), and video/blog tutorials from people like Lukas and Craig, Marc Hyuskens, Grigor Beyerle, and Quanta.
(b) I've always felt the Presonus Studio One manuals to be very well-written and accessible -- my only complaint would be that they weren't technical enough during times of intense troubleshooting, quite the opposite of your predicament.
I generally find what I'm looking for in the PDF manual by searching (ctrl+F) keywords in about 2-3 seconds, sometimes 5 if it's a long phrase. The time it takes for me to find a manual entry is about as long as it takes me to type the keyword/s.
Things aren't mystically named as you suggest, they are literally the name of the item in question within the software, just SEARCH for the term!
That said, Studio One is a DEEP DAW, deceptively so, and again, the reason you likely couldn't find what you were looking for is that the manual isn't technical enough.
This problem was exacerbated when Fender nuked the old support forum 14 months ago, which had thousands upon thousands of threads that contained Google-indexed troubleshooting solutions and tips that are now lost to the general public forever.
To be more specific by providing an example, the way I read and understand ". . . take away more features, make it simpler and more intuitive" maps exactly to the "double-click and show the Channel Overview" behavior, which replaces a bunch of stuff (a) that was available separately but not in one place or required more clicking and navigating with (b) a straightforward solution that is easier for me to use,
Nothing went away!
It's just packaged in an elegant and intuitive way that does not require me to lose focus on the music due to having to mess with a bunch of computer stuff.
While I haven't downloaded the update, I've seen all the promo material and some demo videos of the channel overview, and while it's a good idea, it has been horribly implemented. You will literally work slower attempting to add all the parameters you need manually than simply opening the damn plugin GUI.
Why couldn't they have given us 'VST GUI Presets' instead?!
The 'Toggle Editors' command (F12 for me) does just this, only with a single set of last-open GUI windows.
The tech obviously exists then, to be able to save multiple 'GUI states/locations' for all your VST plugins, as they are saved with 'Toggle Editors'.
It would be an incredible timesaving feature, because you could allot multiple plugin window configurations to different workflows, one for vocals, one for drums, one for guitars, keys, etc. etc.
Instead we got a token feature that doesn't actually accomplish anything, surprise.
The boomer CEO probably designed it himself.
QFT fellow guitar-dude, this is how I expect virtually all guitar players (that I know) to react to something like this...
The corporate people who came up with these changes are living in a bubble, as evidenced by the obtuse name-change.
To be fair so are we, but theirs is more severely disconnected from reality methinks.
I listened to the Joe Gilder guitar and bass amp sim videos. Well, they're certainly an improvement over Ampire. And there aren't as many bass sims people already own, so it's likely some people might find value in them. And in fairness I can see them being a selling point for guitarists who have never recorded to a DAW before, who don't happen to already own the likes of S-Gear, the new UA Paradise Guitar Studio (yummy), Neural, and so on who get a fairly good starting point for free as it now comes with S1, er, I mean FSP. The question is how many of these aspiring guitarists are out there?
Well, what's really going on in the guitar world today, since no one has emerged this century to remotely challenge how deep players got into guitars in the latter part of the last century, is people who want to copy the innovative guitarists of yore since someone has released easy to follow video tutorials or transcriptions of every guitar part that every guitar player last century came up with. That gives anyone with guitar hero aspirations a cheat sheet to live out their dreams of being Hendrix, Page, Van Halen, Richards, etc. There is a lot of that going on in YouTube land, for better or worse.
The small problem with catering to that crowd is that it does nothing for people who want to innovate in the electronic world, or use guitars in non-classic ways. Well it does something: it makes them question why the company is looking backward. But Fender always wants people looking backward to the 1950s, since that's when they originally came up with their enduring guitars and amps that are somehow still moving through sales channels today. In other words, the new direction makes a lot more sense for Fender the company than it does for (former) Studio One customers who are forward looking.
Well, what's really going on in the guitar world today, since no one has emerged this century to remotely challenge how deep players got into guitars in the latter part of the last century, is people who want to copy the innovative guitarists of yore since someone has released easy to follow video tutorials or transcriptions of every guitar part that every guitar player last century came up with. That gives anyone with guitar hero aspirations a cheat sheet to live out their dreams of being Hendrix, Page, Van Halen, Richards, etc. There is a lot of that going on in YouTube land, for better or worse.
The small problem with catering to that crowd is that it does nothing for people who want to innovate in the electronic world, or use guitars in non-classic ways. Well it does something: it makes them question why the company is looking backward. But Fender always wants people looking backward to the 1950s, since that's when they originally came up with their enduring guitars and amps that are somehow still moving through sales channels today. In other words, the new direction makes a lot more sense for Fender the company than it does for (former) Studio One customers who are forward looking.
Last edited:
Wow so many moans about the name! Who gives a flying fader about the name of their DAW 
Glad to see video added to Show Page, doesn't look as if anything else has been added to Shows, DMX would be good, but at least if there's a new feature then maybe they haven't abandoned it after all...
I wish they'd sort the automatic language options on their website though - I have to scroll all the way down to the foot of the page to select ENGLISH (I live in France and it automatically chooses French) but then when I click on a link within that English page it reverts to French - anyway what I couldn't find was System Requirements - I use the Show page on an older MacBook Pro running Monterey, and would like to know if this new release will run on it. I'll go for the upgrade at 99€ anyway, for the M4 Studio Mac - I like the overall look and some of the new features seem useful - and I'm upgrading from version 6 so that's a good deal for me, having not bothered to spend 149 to go from 6 to 7. Always good to have the latest version anyway, and I can keep V6 in case there are issues whilst they bug-shoot 3rd party plugins.
And again guys, the name?? get over it!! I've got a 1963 Fender Jaguar sitting in the corner - I'm fairly sure I won't get mixed up and try to connect my MIDI controller to it.....
Glad to see video added to Show Page, doesn't look as if anything else has been added to Shows, DMX would be good, but at least if there's a new feature then maybe they haven't abandoned it after all...
I wish they'd sort the automatic language options on their website though - I have to scroll all the way down to the foot of the page to select ENGLISH (I live in France and it automatically chooses French) but then when I click on a link within that English page it reverts to French - anyway what I couldn't find was System Requirements - I use the Show page on an older MacBook Pro running Monterey, and would like to know if this new release will run on it. I'll go for the upgrade at 99€ anyway, for the M4 Studio Mac - I like the overall look and some of the new features seem useful - and I'm upgrading from version 6 so that's a good deal for me, having not bothered to spend 149 to go from 6 to 7. Always good to have the latest version anyway, and I can keep V6 in case there are issues whilst they bug-shoot 3rd party plugins.
And again guys, the name?? get over it!! I've got a 1963 Fender Jaguar sitting in the corner - I'm fairly sure I won't get mixed up and try to connect my MIDI controller to it.....
Fender Studio Pro 8 requires macOS® 13.5 (Ventura) or higher.
Here are the full system requirements for macOS:
- macOS® 13.5 (Ventura)** or higher
- Intel® Core™ i3 / Apple® M1 processor or better
- Internet connection (needed for installation and activation)
- Monitor with 1280 x 768 resolution (Retina display recommended)
- A multi-touch enabled monitor with TUIO support is required for touch operation
- 8 GB RAM minimum
- 40 GB hard-drive space