it's easier to ignore and let the solution die (as the suggestion requires WORK).
Huh peter?

Kinda telling.

JoeD

That's pretty harsh, JoeD. I don't know about your experience with software engineering, but I've got the sense that the model is something like this:

Phase 1: Collect underpants.
Phase 2: Fix the damn bugs!
Phase 3: Profit.

I fully support the notion that you should finish what you started before implementing new, MAJOR functionality into an application. Otherwise the whole thing goes down the drain, and the solution dies much as you said. And the suggestion that the SF crew are afraid of work is somewhat ridiculous.

Not "afraid" of work. (???)

They are now LIMITED in their product planning\releases (sony buyout? good? Bad?).

I'm sorry - THIS IS NOT THE OLD SF. The old SF that I once knew, knew how to remain on top by sticking to the important areas as per flagship applications.

This new sf is sleezy in a way now....the marketing vs. product return (see V4) is out of balance. Compartmentalized, incompatible products. Sleezy.

The old SF was - "go for it, make it the best, streamlined, compatible". The new SF is "LIMIT THE GODDAMN GOODS".

I'm hoping someone there with a brain can see this and turn it around.
I'll repeat it until it rings untrue. You think a phone call to support's gonna do it?
This forum to Peter is the closest he'll get to true user opinion - from a user who's been with them at the beggining....and even THAT stinks (there are more users out there with views people, that never even consider this msg board).

Don't just take my word for it, many SF diehards (who also use to work for SF) can and will solidify these comments.
The word of the day is "sleezy".

this is an important thread - one I'm guessing certain people at SF hope will die (again, there's the "new" SF for ya).
Screw civility at this point, I'm not getting too much civility from SF's posts either.

JD

Hmmm, sorry Joe don't agree with one word of your last post.
B.

actually, I will say you're right then. Peter is being civil about this. You're right, I'm wrong there. He can get rather "snippy" with his posts with me, but I've been snippy as well.
That was then - this is now so I'll stand corrected.

I'm just bothered with the fact that these great products aren't being perfected into what could be THE solution for users and THE flagship application for SF. Not one being trampled upon by poor marketing.
Then I can stop being THE harping a-hole here.

I would rather be honest with how I'm seeing this, rather than bullshit SF, others... even myself simply out of complacency.

I assure you...It could easily be the top application in the content creation field (audio, music video (loop based music??), video).
There's no reason why it can't or shouldn't. The UI alone could sway tons of users of competitive applications\systems.
I've been with SF long enough to know how stabilty improves in the timeline.

Emotional?...eh whatever. I just see it as a complete resolve to efficient content creation and yet it's being "parted out" poorly. That is half the game when work needs to be done and dates need to be met. That's the important factor with specialists in the field.
Hell, charge more for it, I could care less...but let's get the streamlining going.

Really though...so far all I've seen is that this won't ever be considered again.
Maybe a re-wire solution can help a bit (not too crazy about it) but I really would prefer "VegAcid" as i've described.
Best thing about VegAcid is that it's 85% already there. Why not just complete the circle.

JoeD

JoeD
"would prefer "VegAcid"

Acidas ?

g.

Really though...so far all I've seen is that this won't ever be considered again.

That is totally incorrect; Peter has clearly stated that ACID style loop tracks are a possibility for V5.

For the past two versions SF has spent nearly all their bickies on the Video stuff. This time around they are saying they are going to spend them on audio.

Lets see what they come up with...

"Mayjor_User
As far as the magazines go, you know you can't believe what you read. SF has never been the darling of the mags, and it's all hype anyway. SF hasn't cultivated ..."

Actually that says more about the depth and credibility of mags than SF.

Sound On Sound have had individual reviews of SForge, Acid, vegas, and CDA, and in a recent article on mastering both CDA and Sforge got mentions and screenshots (along with Wavelab and a few others).

Hopefully with the Sony thang, SF apps will be getting a lot more exposure than before. I know the SF programmers are very invigorated at the thought.


geoff

Man, I don't know about you, but I would call ASIO support, FX automation, Bus automation, 5.1 surround, input monitoring, and the greatly improved time strach/squash a major upgrade from 3.0. I love these features..... I just wish we could get the bugs out! 4.0 rocks this audio man's world (or it will when the bugs are out!)

Yeah, I’m not saying they are bad updates.

ASIO and input monitoring were badly needed by many people.

But things like FX automation and buss tracks are very solid improvements on already existing structures. And things like improved internal audio stretching and improved FX bypass are hardly blockbuster new features.

I’d also argue that 5.1 is far more important to video users than audio users.

Go to the help file and have a squiz at everything on the ‘What’s new in Vegas 4.0’ page.

The video stuff way outguns the audio stuff. Not only in numbers, check out the complexity and scope of some of that video stuff.

hello,

¶me, I have acid4 pro, soundforge6 and vegas4.¶
¶I make music exclusively.¶
¶I live in France.¶"Europe".¶
¶I am often motivated to change program.¶

¶cubase and nuendo, samplitude, audio logic…
¶but I do not manage to leave sonicfoundry.¶
¶because all 3 program is higher than all the others.¶

¶simpler of use.¶
¶less bug.¶
professional.¶in quality.¶
¶fast response of the hotline.¶
¶taking into account of the wishes of the users.¶


¶I wish that a footbridge allow transtférer the tracks acid in végas.¶
¶I wish new presets for accoustic mirror.¶

¶I wish that acid record into multitrack midifiles…;

¶but that remains comfort.¶

¶tested the other software and you will return to sofo.¶

¶long life with sofo and Sony.¶

And your point? Or I guess I should be asking.... what else do you want? For me, Vegas 4 adressed nearly everything that I wished Vegas 3 could do for audio. There are still some details I want in V5, but for me V4 was a HUGE audio improvement over V3.
Just because there were more video enhancements doesn't mean the audio is being ignored. I'm happy with the upgrade.
Of course MIDI capabilities would change everything, but it was always my understanding that Vegas was meant to be used with a seperate MIDI sequencer. I like this approach (Keep it simple!)