Can't quite believe this hasn't been 'fixed'

ibliss wrote on 1/16/2003, 10:31 PM
When you open up the video FX window, the name (if one is entered) of the track will appear at the top of the window as 'Video Track FX:******(name of track)'.

Open up video event FX and the name of the take will appear: 'Video Event FX:******'

Open up the surround panner window and the name of the track will be shown in that.

Audio track FX, Busses and Assignable FX do not show a (chosen) name in the FX window.

It certainly isn't critical, but it does seem like an oversight, not having changed since version 3.

Keep up the great work guys.

Really like the way you can ajust FX automation directly from the plugin window.

Comments

ibliss wrote on 1/17/2003, 4:34 PM
Just a shameless bump.

So, is the above tweakable for the release version of Vegas 4?

And a mono switch on the master bus would be nice. :)
Ben  wrote on 1/17/2003, 5:08 PM
Yep, we had a mono button for version 2, but this has since disappeared...god knows why.

A few of us mentioned this a while back, and I was hoping that it's something pretty simple that could easily be put back in (dim switch anyone?!? Why?!?).

Btw, can't say I ever noticed this FX thing (I wholly ignore the video stuff), but it's a good point.

Unfortunately, I reckon there's quite a few glaring oversights like this. When I get a spare minute or two, I'll post some of them...

Ben
ibliss wrote on 1/17/2003, 5:44 PM
The 'Dim' switch is actually a very useful thing to have (but I'm biased because it's one of the suggestions I made ages ago!). Read the description in the help file if you want to get a better idea of why it's there.

It's actually something you'll find on a lot of mixing desks, to let you cut and restore the volume without spoiling your carefully-balanced amp setup (think 2-channel amps with seperate gain controls....now picture a 5.1 setup).

If you are doing a lot of editing it can be easier on the ears too! (particularly when scrubbing).

Have I convinced you yet? ;)
Ben  wrote on 1/17/2003, 6:13 PM
Ibliss - errr, yeah, I know what a dim switch is, and that was why I made my point. Well, it was a brief aside really.

There's nothing wrong with having a dim switch, but a mono button would have been useful as well. Hell, you find both these features on mixing desks. I can live with or without both in Vegas, though for me the mono button would have been nice. Like the dim button, we're talking such, simple, dead easy things to implement. All seems very strange. Doesn't need to be one or the other - that was my point really.

The cynic in me would say that adding a dim button is a very, cheap, quick and easy way for SoFo to add another bullet point to Vegas' new feature list, without really doing anything useful!

Ben
ibliss wrote on 1/17/2003, 6:39 PM
"we're talking such, simple, dead easy things to implement.... adding a dim button is a very, cheap, quick and easy way for SoFo to add another bullet point to Vegas' new feature list, without really doing anything useful!

I don't think they would have put it in purely for another bullet point (don't listen to that cynic!). In fact they don't even list it in the new features list.

It may or may not be an easy thing to implement, but it still takes time, however much. And I'm certain they spend much time considering what they will and won't be adding to the app.

But I also remember the posts not so long ago (within the last 6 months) where Peter (i think) did say that he would investigate the mono switch.... I guess there's still hope for that code to be resurected. I might just go and email a 'bug' report.

Here's a link to the thread I was thinking about.
pwppch wrote on 1/17/2003, 8:18 PM
>>Like the dim button, we're talking such, simple, dead easy things to implement. All seems very strange.
<<
Really? Not as dead simple as you think.
PipelineAudio wrote on 1/17/2003, 8:36 PM
"Why is it that everything that a user thinks is soooo easy and simple are by far the hardest things to accomplish?"

because we think the things that have been around the longest and are most familiar to us would be simplest. We take certain things that have been around for forever in the hardware world for granted and just assume that it would be easy in software. I know its not right. My request for being able to use outboard gear in realtime with vegas, without horrid latency seems SO simple in the real world, and I bet it would be a horrible nightmare programming wise, if even possible

pwppch wrote on 1/17/2003, 8:44 PM
>>My request for being able to use outboard gear in realtime with vegas, without horrid latency seems SO simple in the real world, and I bet it would be a horrible nightmare programming wise, if even possible
<<
Actually we now have the framework started for such a thing. With input monitoring available, it is 90% UI to solve and integrate this kind of a feature. No promises, but it is something that I would like as well.
Ben  wrote on 1/17/2003, 8:54 PM
>>> Really? Not as dead simple as you think.

FWIW: The mono switch to make the audio Mono is trivial, I will agree. That is converting to mono at the last ouput stage is simple.

The problem is the UI. Faders have to change, meters change, etc, etc. <<<

But Peter, the reason I asked for it is that you guys have already made the feature and for some reason ripped it out! The mono button was in Vegas 2; that's why I thought it'd be so simple to put it back in. Why did it disappear in Vegas 3?

FWIW, for me at least, I'd have no need for the meters, fades, etc to change - as long as when the button was pressed I know I'm monitoring in mono (I can see the button depressed, and can hear mono - that's good enough for me). It's not like I'd want to actually use, output or render mono audio - it's merely for checking mono compatability.

Thanks
Ben
PipelineAudio wrote on 1/17/2003, 8:58 PM
dont tease the bears!