'Toggle' is the word!



I will pass on the info to you in a couple of days. I do not have Internet in the studio

'Toggle' is the word!
And your point is?

>>This is the method I am accustomed to and would assume the only way the hardware control could be useful.
<<
Accustomed to based on what? Your assumption is very wrong based upon your explination so far, but I will wait until you give me more details on what it is you really are doing and what your approach is and what it is based on.

Hi Peter

What is your email please?

Ian

"i.e.

foobar.xml"

This is the problem why it's not working correctly, you're spelling the name of the .XML file wrong. Everyone knows the correct spelling for "foobar" is "fubar".

Just a little humor break :-)

phaller AT sonypictures.com

Peter

Peter; I have sent you the xml files. I only just reread your request for XML’s from other hosts but I can’t do that today.




'Toggle' is the word!
[ And your point is? ]

-It’s the word I haven’t been using but the term I was meaning.

[ Define what a "Virtual Mute button" is? ]

-A term I used to clarify if I’m talking about the physical button or the software button. I’ll call it “Vegas button” then since we are only interested in the Vegas implementation

"We are on a learning curve here - both Sony and our users. "

Respectfully ,,,,at who's expense?

"Respectfully ,,,,at who's expense?"

Quotes from SonyPCH:

"Bottom line is we don't currently work that way. We will be improving this feature over time. That is why we implemented the notion of "drivers"."

"FWIW: The goal for Vegas 5 was the Mackie Control Universal and a simple, but limited Generic Driver. We knew that we would not support every device out of the box. We also knew there would be complaints from users because their particular device would not be fully supported - if at all - out of the box."

"A driver written for a specific device can account for all of the specifics and be tuned to make it integrate how we believe it should be integrated. The Generic driver for our app is limited. I am the first to admit this. Again, our goal was to provide tight integration with device specific drivers. The generic driver is a simple solution for devices that don't have specific drivers. It is in no way designed or intended to replace the solution that we recommend. "

"I was actually against releasing the generic driver just for the reasons that are being presented here. There will always be complaints about the level of integration it provides.

However, there are "features" of the Generic driver that are not exposed through the current configuration utility shipped with Vegas. The Generic driver is based upon an XML template file that has far more capabilities than we expose currently.

This XML format will be released as part of the SDK for hardware vendors. We also have intent to release some built templates for more devices that can be loaded by the generic driver. While this will not provide complete integration, it will address some of the concerns and problems raised here."


Rednroll:
I'm not sure what you mean by "at who's expense?" It seems to me SonyPCH has explained everything clearly more than once in the above quotes. They already know the generic driver has problems with "some" hardware. They are looking into fixing it, although that was not their initial design intention for Vegas. For the Yamaha mixers, myself and others have already outlined some issues using the generic driver, SonyPCH has already responded that they are looking into this strange behavior and working with Yamaha and will see if the generic driver can be improved. This is over and above their original design intent as outlined. The original intent was for the hardware manufacturer to make their own driver for "Their" hardware. They said, they already know the generic driver is not perfect, and how could it be if there's 100 different hardware controlers and they ALL do things differently? That's what they mean by "learning curve". The best thing they can do is hear from users which hardware you are having troubles with and the specifics, and then they can investigate that specific hardware and see if they can improve the generic driver to respond more appropriate. It seems like they're asking the right questions, but not getting the correct responses. Users say, "this controler works in Nuendo with their generic driver". Well, obviously Nuendo has spent more development time with their generic driver. Did it work with "every" hardware controler perfectly when they first released Nuendo? I highly doubt it. But if you can give the details of "which hardware controler", and "which driver" you are using in Nuendo, then they can further investigate those 2 items and how they integrate and what "You" as a user are expecting.

Is this so hard to understand?

I agree with you,,,,but was that quote from peter on the list of new features in vegas? If it was then it would be a different story,,, I have already explained the issues I,m having with vegas5 with peter, he has been very helpful and understanding. My quote " at who's expense" originates from my frustration ,(that was my feeling) I was happily using vegas 4 and excitied about the upgrade to vegas 5 but on my computer it was a nightmare...(not to mention I was starting my first music video for a client)Things always seem to work that way ,,don't they?I'm a experienced user in music production using many software programs and always relied on SF programs. I'm in the process of doing some testing and trying to find where the problems originate,,Lets face it,, you invest in something ,,expecting it to function properly and it doesn't,,

at who's expense? At OUR expense of course. Evry time you mess with a new product it is at YOUR expense.

its also much at THEIR expense, dont forget that

Messing around with vegas has cost me countless hours, trying to get it to do what it should

so what?

Messing around with an SSL e series cost me an exponentially larger number of hours trying to get it to do what it said, and it cost us more than one HUNDRED times as much as vegas did

this is a HUGE learning curve for all involved. The vegas developers may not know much about the day to day workings of a studio, hence some of the admittedly grevious setbacks, but you know, if any of us were anywhere near as good at coding, wed have made our own apps

its a give and take, we take the results of their work, and we give them a lot of shit about it

why Peter hasnt personally banned me off of this forum, or at least refused to answer my emails is beyond me. I torture these guys, but you know what, to punish me for tormenting them, they put out a better version of vegas every time.

Every legitamate gripe is a step in the right direction and hopefully you send it also to product feedback. Just whining about general stuff ( as I have done for far too long) really gets you nowhere fast.

We really need a way to show our support for SF, at least if we could all post some stuff we made with it somewhere

"but was that quote from peter on the list of new features in vegas?"

Actually it wasn't. Here's how the feature list on this read out during the beta builds.

External surface support (Note: ships with Mackie Control support, others in the works. SDK will be forthcoming also)

I was highly disappointed because for the majority of the time of the beta testing, the ONLY hardware support driver was the Mackie. So here I was with a feature that I've been asking for since Vegas 1.0 and I couldn't even try it out. Then a couple builds before the final release the generic driver appeared. I tested it out using my Yamaha 03D. It seemed to work ,but was acting strange on some aspects. I wasn't sure if it was Vegas or my hardware. I downloaded midi-ox just so I could see what the 03D was sending out. I found that I was pretty disappointed with some of the things the 03D, was doing. Once I got that confusion cleared up, it was the week of scheduled ship date and I got a chance to fully test out the generic driver and found it was doing some strange things using my Yamaha board as a controler. I even offered to ship my 03D to Peter if he needed a Yamaha mixer to see what the problem was. He said he was going to work through Yamaha, but if he had any problems he would take me up on the offer. That's the thing you need to realize, they don't have every hardware controler out there to make sure they all work. And all of them work differently from one another. I found even on the same mixer, the 03D, that it would send out different midi cc messages, depending on which mode I chose. Do I feel disappointed that my Yamaha mixer doesn't function 100%? Yes. Am I thankful it works at all? Hell yeah!!! Am I confident Peter will get it functioning 100% and then some?....he hasn't let me down yet, he usually exceeds my expectations whenever I report something not working properly.

"...(not to mention I was starting my first music video for a client)Things always seem to work that way"

You should take that as further experience. Any experienced engineer in here, will tell you to NEVER use a new release with critical paying jobs until you've put the tool through some tests. You avoid a lot of surprises that way. Always work with something you are well comfortable with it's strengths and weaknesses. I'm also wondering how the H/W control not working properly, hindered anything.....ok, so it didn't work, use your mouse like you've had to do for the last 4 versions.

" I'm also wondering how the H/W control not working properly, hindered anything"

The function of it is one issue, the other issue I'm having is Vegas 5 randomly freezing when I use the data wheel,, Also some font coruption,,,under options, the words" external control" mysteriously vanishing..