@adimatis VEGAS's is based on orignal .NET WinForms' UI.

This is not true...

In fact, the UI dates back to before .NET was even released. Much of the UI in VEGAS is based off of raw Win32 code and GDI drawing (not even MFC).

I really didn't expect it is so old.

Glad to see you weighing in and setting everything straight, it's easy to get things wrong when looking in from the outside, Derek.

I for one don't mind the current UI, even if I recognize areas where it could be better. I'd much rather see all the effort put into making Vegas run as smoothly and stable as possible with modern tools before we get to those nit-picks. I'm sure many of us here can agree, function over form!

I'm also really happy to hear about the team doubling in size soon... if you can take Vegas this far in 4 years with the team you have already, I can only imagine what 2x as many people will be able to do over the coming years.

I'm with fr0sty. :)

One other thing that would probably be quite amazing and definitely useful for us is getting in Vegas team the two guys from Vegasaur.

LE: Yes indeed there are many others who produce amazing add-ons for Vegas, I do talk about all of them. Like happy-otter-scripts-for-vegas-pro for instance. Or some others.

I was thinking, and probably another 95% of the Vegas users, how cool would it be to have natively in Vegas all the added features and improvements that would be available.

Shouldn't this be possible?

Add the kit into Vegas, for an extra 50-75 bucks, EVERYONE is happier.

@fr0sty

I do not mind the current UI either. I've seen worst. But I am sure there would be one or two things you'd like to see in. For me, under the current UI, probably what I'd need was a way to chance the icon's size - to have at least "big" and "small".

Glad to see you weighing in and setting everything straight, it's easy to get things wrong when looking in from the outside, Derek.

I for one don't mind the current UI, even if I recognize areas where it could be better. I'd much rather see all the effort put into making Vegas run as smoothly and stable as possible with modern tools before we get to those nit-picks. I'm sure many of us here can agree, function over form!

I'm also really happy to hear about the team doubling in size soon... if you can take Vegas this far in 4 years with the team you have already, I can only imagine what 2x as many people will be able to do over the coming years.

I'm with fr0sty. :)

Me too!

Add the kit into Vegas, for an extra 50-75 bucks, EVERYONE is happier.

So you would not want to pay the current price of the kit? And does it include all that's requested (so far) here?

How much more for the HOS included?

And thanks @VEGASDerek for the comments.

Sorry, that's beyond my point.

Which actually is:

Get those people around who are one way or another adding to what Vegas experience is, work as a team and take the product to the next level!

Does not matter if I'd be willing to pay the current price for the kit. :) And of course it would NOT include all that's requested - how could it?

It matters that all the contributions to what Vegas could be, from various people, would make a BETTER product for LESS cost if they were all working together. Which in the end should make everyone happier, including the users.

I am not saying the Cockos Reaper model should be replicate necessarily, but I do remember some years ago when they actually encouraged people, on their forums, to come up half-publicly with ideas, suggestions, alpha-testing, etc and I think I remember at one point they had a pool to identify the top 20 (or so) most requested features... And I think they actually implemented in their program some of the graphic ideas that were presented...

It was a while ago, cannot remember details. But you've got the idea.

Oh, I'd love to see Vegas improving, not only for the obvious reasons, but also because I do believe it is a great piece of software that is well deserving to thrive and move ahead with competition!

I really hope that's the case and in 2 or 3 or 5 or 10 years we can still enjoy working with it, in a modern fashion, on par with everything that other NLEs offer!!!

I've been using Vegas since it was split into an audio and video app.

Back in 2009 I needed a more full-featured audio app and started looking outside of Vegas. I checked out all of the big, established names, then came across a new DAW, Studio One by Presonus. The was a ground up, forward looking project. I tried the demo, couldn't break it and bought the full version. It WAS missing quite a few of the features of the established products back then. But all of the necessary things were there and it simply did not crash. Ever. It also has some great features others didn't due to it's ground up design, like integrated mastering, which actually is useful.

Anyway, 10 years later, on version 4 the software is as full-featured as it's rivals and completely stable. I mean rock solid, never goes down. I'm sure the modern code base has also made adding features much easier for the developers since they are working with a solid, modern foundation and aren't constantly chasing bugs.

So what's the point of my post?

There may be users, possibly a lot of users, who would accept a scaled back re-designed Vegas on a new modern code base. I would certainly accept a really fast, stable version of Vegas even if it were missing many of less important features added over the last 5 or more years. It just really needs to have the great Vegas edit flow and be fast and stable. These features are what drew me to Vegas 20 years ago.

My fear is that the longer Magix chases Vegas down the rabbit hole more time will be spent on chasing bugs and developing workarounds rather than just doing what needs to be done.

I'll continue to use Vegas regardless but since this thread was started I wanted to voice my opinion.

I'm not a developer, I'm an engineer. I have done some programming it was a long time ago. I started with Assembly and later moved to Fortran. Imagine a tightly hand coded assembly kernel at the core of Vegas handling the compute intensive routines. It would be glorious! I would put my money where my mouth is with a preorder.

If want to find a more reasonable reason for purchasing Vegasaur team, it would be to make Vegasaur more integrated with VGEAS Pro.

Such as :

Integrating Vegasaur's excellent "Create nested timeline form selected track or event" feature to VEGAS Pro's context menu;

Integrating Vegasaur's "exponential, circle, back...keyframe curve" to VEGAS Pro's Pan/crop, track motion and OFX keyframe's context menu;

Integrating Vegasaur's "Pin motion track to FX's position parameter" to VEGAS Pro's besier mask;

Integrating Vegasaur's "Track motion: copy, delete, paste" to VEGAS Pro track's context menu;

Integrating Vegasaur's "Text Generation Wizard" to VEGAS Pro's "Insert" menu;

Integrating Vegasaur's "Import 2D motion tracking Data" to VEGAS Pro's pan/crop and track motion;

Integrating Vegasaur's "Beat detect" to VEGAS Pro audio event's context menu;

And so on.....

It will make VEGAS Pro has a big leap.

In a sense, Vegasaur's team seems to understand VGEAS Pro more than VEGAS Pro team.....

However, the purchase is the case between they two comany. Maybe they have some other consideration.

f want to find a more reasonable reason for purchasing Vegasaur team, it would be to make Vegasaur more integrated with VGEAS Pro.

Yes - assuming that you mean that Vegas Creative Software purchases Vegasaur.

However, the purchase is the case between their two comany. Maybe they have some other consideration.

Yes. It's definitely a business consideration between the two companies as it is with any companies considering acquisition or merger - but no-one knows if these two companies actually are having such discussions. Anything along these lines is purely speculative..

@Hulk

So it happens that I myself have used Studio One in the last years for a reasonable number of productions. I think you made a very good point comparing. Such an excellent piece of software!

Actually, I had the privilege of knowing a close friend of one of Presonus' most important members and through this person who I came to know, I got in contact with them, on behalf of a charity I am involved with. Without going into details, I have to say, I discovered they were not only excellent professionals, but some absolutely amazing good hearten people who were ready to support others in such a kind and gentle manner!

Anyway, on topic: you probably know that also Studio One was actually developed by Presonus from an older code, written by some German guys, under a company called I think Kristal, or something like that. So, when Presonus bought their product, the work was enormous to develop, modernize and market it into the excellent product that Studio One is today! But they did it indeed. And like you said, today this DAW is much preferred by many against the "all-mighty" Pro Tools.

@adimatis,

Yes it was a German development team. As you know the software to this day is flawless. I used to use it with a Presonus Firestudio Tube interface and now with and RME Fireface 802. Absolutely perfect.

Do you by chance remember audio software from the early 1990's called SAW? Software Audio Workshop? It was the first really usable multitrack recording software. All hand coded in Assembly by the genius Bob Lentini. Multitracking with good quality eq and compression on a Pentium 90!!! It was amazing. It was a couple of MB's and ran from the *.exe file. No installation. Brilliant.

Back to the topic, I think it important for software developers to not underestimate how savvy we, the users are. Especially when it comes to pro level software. For years and years the battle to market software has taken place on the side of an imaginary box using a list of new and often not very useful new features. Let's face it after 10 or 15 versions most software has most of the most useful features already baked in.

What good is some new fancy feature if the application keeps breaking? Or if you constantly have to engage in workarounds? I personally try not to go over 20 minutes with a single project. After creating all of the segments I drop the mini-projects into a master timeline (one pins and needles with fingers crossed) for the final render. Vegas seems to be more stable with short projects so working this way is more creative for me.

Sometimes a step back is a step forward. 90% of editing is simply ordering and cutting clips on a timeline and immediately seeing the result in real time. It's a creative process. The rest is fluff and only enhances the storytelling.

I'll say (write) it again. Vegas is fantastic in it's current state and I will continue to use it. But I would wholeheartedly support a ground up rewrite with stability and speed being the most important selling points. The features could be added later in subsequent releases.

What initially drew me to Vegas 20+ years ago was it's great interface, speed, and stability. Let's go back there.

But it must be hard to convince a marketing department of such an endeavor. I can imagine their response. "So you want to remove a ton of features from the software to completely rewrite it to be faster and more stable and this will cost a lot more than simply adding 5 new features?" Yes that's it, you have it! People will get it. They will understand. And our technical department will eventually be able to shift away from continually fixing the current software to actually developing the new one! It's a long view approach generally not embraced by marketing.

And yes, I actually use Vegas. Here's a short I did for my local church a few years ago during Lent. I "gave" time for Lent. It's nothing special but with Vegas I put it together in no time. The nagging sore spot to this day is the audio. I only brought an omni directional mic, which was completely wrong for that reverberate environment! 30 years in the audio world and I still make rookie mistakes!

http://mmotcp.org/page-2/stained-glass-windows

:) Interesting video that windows story... I enjoyed it!

Yes, I do remember SAW. Never work with it, though. As far as I recall it used to terribly expensive, I guess only few people would have had access to it. But I also recall being considered an amazing "virtual mixing console" and was held dear for many years by those using it...

About Vegas... It would be definitely very interesting a pool to vote for the features to dropped, rather than added. I think that would be quite a surprise in the industry. :) Anyway, would be of interest indeed to know what exactly features would need to be dropped in order to have a new Vegas based on fresh, future-proof code basis.

If "resample modes" needs to go, I vote for it. :)

Joking aside, as I mentioned several time already I think, I guess it is a matter of time before indeed Vegas will need to eventually have AT LEAST some of it's code re-written for the future updates.

Or indeed made into a completely new program.

I bought a piece of MIDI gear from the SAW Studio Phone Support guy, working out of his house; so I went to the house in Montebello, Ca, and that thing was running on Pentium 3 chips, (as I recall) and doing amazing things, backflips, multi track, speed up, slow down, move the cursor anyway, no pausing, everything on the fly. "Hand coded" was the way he described Bob Lentinis's master work (although it was ugly as sin, and STILL IS!! Bob was no graphic guru, and probably did his own graphic design. Horrible, but I digress.)

Vegas Concept wise is TERRIFIC, the best, WYSIWYG. Execution wise, still needs work. GUI routines, they should consult Magix's own Samplitude crew, also German engineers.

Coding wise, yes, could use a revamp. Interface is fine, like I said, needs some fine tuning, sometimes robust fine tuning, but don't throw out the baby with the dirty bathwater. PLEASE, don't do that.

Joking aside, as I mentioned several time already I think, I guess it is a matter of time before indeed Vegas will need to eventually have AT LEAST some of it's code re-written for the future updates.

That is basically what is already happening. They are either refining old code or replacing it with newer stuff that does the same thing (like removing quicktime dependency and creating so4compoundplug.dll to handle that and more). They're rebuilding it piece by piece. Don't think they're just taking 20 year old code, putting a paint job on it, adding a few new shoehorned features, and calling it a day. They do a lot of work under the hood which has paid off a lot in performance gains over the years. I've noticed it, I keep a benchmark project around so I can test Vegas in a real-world multicam edit environment. I've seen nothing but gains since Version 14 when it comes to how fast I can edit it and how smoothly I can play it.

The only way of vegas to catch up with other NLE is to create a DAW inside the video software. The problem with the segmentation is that you cannot offer a killer app and in this case, Vegas could become the first NLE that include a MIDI and AUDIO DAW. Imagine the flexibility this could bring to individual creators. You have the software writen in the other magix products, is just to integrate it. Let us to modify your audio and MIDI inside vegas, compose music at the same time we cut video, apply vst instruments etc.. etc...

Another way is a phone App where you can control some vegas buttons from a tablet or a phone. The DAW Waveform has implemented it and is really amazing.

You need to move too this ASAP.

Correct all. ^^^

After all, that's the idea: present a product that looks and behaves modern. That is what will grant future interest, support and why not loyalty from customers. Basically, growth.

Nobody really care how old the core-code is, really. Or, more to the point, it does not matter, as long as it does not prevent future improvements.

I agree totally there were some serious improvements in the last years - I hope and trust they will be continued in the next versions and @fr0sty and indeed @VEGASDerek already said earlier in this thread that this is the case.

Now, to give this a rest, I can say I am intrigued and excited to hear about enlarging the team, adding new features, etc. I am hopeful and while still kinda disappointed not all is perfect with Vegas, I am definitely enjoying using it - almost every day - and return to it always as my main editor to work with, due of course to the familiarity and efficiency.

If a complete re-write of the code is not possible and not even needed, that is super! :) This is under-the-hood and does not matter so much if there aren't immediate limits to prevent future plans.

What I think is really needed though is a tighten-up of UI and stabilization of GPU integration.

Maybe a UI revamp is already in the plans, as for what two or three versions now, Vegas has basically the same look. Maybe the wait was considered just to allow a more eye-candy interface development and I'd like to believe there are graphic designers in the team too, who are concerned with these aspects! :)

For some of us here the functionality is the only thing that matters. And truly, it is the most important. But I make the case of making Vegas also "good looking" because you know what they say: "before knowing the inner beauty, you are hit with a pretty face"! :) Something approximate.

On the GPU integration, not only reliability is to be improved, but also the essential concept of loading the GPU vs CPU. As I said, I am not a "software coder" , I have no idea what or if it is possible with Vegas to do differently, but I think without a proper optimization of GPU load, the performance will always suffer.

I said I will not mention names :) and so there is this other program that is making an excellent use of the GPU and either in editing or rendering, the load is distributed much nicer, the resources of the system seems to be managed much better and because of that, the whole workflow is helped tremendously.

Vegas needs to do it and I hope Vegas 18 is already a step further in this department already.

So thank you for sharing your thoughts and I hope this was somewhat useful exercise, I know I did learn some things and why not, I am positive about it!

All of you, keep safe and well! :)

Adi