# Logic 9!!



## Hannesdm (Jul 23, 2009)

It looks like Logic 9 is coming our way! 8) 

http://www.apple.com/logicstudio/logicpro/


----------



## tfishbein82 (Jul 23, 2009)

Looks great, but is it 64-bit (not that it's a big deal, since 64-bit plugs seem to work on Mac anyway)?


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 23, 2009)

Wow!!! Thanks, man!!!


----------



## IvanP (Jul 23, 2009)

Doesn't say anything about 64 :(


----------



## david robinson (Jul 23, 2009)

for intel only.
no PPC.
DR9.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 23, 2009)

IvanP @ 23/7/2009 said:


> Doesn't say anything about 64 :(



I'm pretty sure that it's not. We'll have to wait for 9.1 or something.


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Jul 23, 2009)

Lots of great new features if the implemented them well. I hope the exchange thing works as well as DP's chunks. This has been badly missing.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 23, 2009)

Unless he has changed his mind, 2 years ago Dr. Lengeling told me 64 bit creates more problems than it solves and that there were other better ways to achieve the same benefits.


----------



## gsilbers (Jul 23, 2009)

love the drum editing features.. the guitar amps, playbacks and other fx are just the same but with new GUI imo. not bad as other companies are jumping into the 
"if it looks nice then people will think it sounds nice" . 
good i like how logic plugs sound. 

and awsome!! it has import session data or selective track import. man it took them long for this. 

the takes editing still a little iffy for me, i still like better the pro tools 8 version. 
but will have to use it to have a better understanding.

i like the drum replacement feature, although is the same as before but faster.


----------



## Stevie (Jul 23, 2009)

That sounds like a bad excuse to me. He won't be able to stop future development towards 64bit. Of course there are issues with 64bit, but only because we use 32bit at the moment. It's a migration problem (using 32bit plugins with a 64bit host and so on...).


----------



## gsilbers (Jul 23, 2009)

Stevie @ Thu Jul 23 said:


> That sounds like a bad excuse to me. He won't be able to stop future development towards 64bit. Of course there are issues with 64bit, but only because we use 32bit at the moment. It's a migration problem (using 32bit plugins with a 64bit host and so on...).




well, to be fair.. our niche is small and most outside filmscoring doesnt need 64 bit performance and if they do is for the samples instrument for which exs24 has been 
written to use ram outside of logic. 

im all for it. but im my own little speculation i think 64 bit will probably come out after snow leopard that has been re written for better performance. 
although i dont know how apple is going to do because snow leopard wont be compatible with PPC computers so some poeple are not going to like that.


----------



## MrHighlandPark (Jul 23, 2009)

I was hoping to see more about updates to the plugins. I had been wondering if the next update would bring a space designer that's more competitive with altiverb, but I don't see a thing about new IRs.

I guess as I look through the list of features, I'm not seeing anything that impacts me personally.


----------



## mikebarry (Jul 23, 2009)

EXS24 Ram lives in logic. I have done tests to check this.
For example load enough EXS24 and you will crash logic.

Kind of disappointed by this - was expecting more in terms of RAM performance.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 23, 2009)

Short review already: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-10293712-37.html


----------



## gsilbers (Jul 23, 2009)

mikebarry @ Thu Jul 23 said:


> EXS24 Ram lives in logic. I have done tests to check this.
> For example load enough EXS24 and you will crash logic.
> 
> Kind of disappointed by this - was expecting more in terms of RAM performance.



did you have the "virtualization" feature selected? 

im not into using exs24 nor samplers inside my daw/logic. i use standalone/bidule with k3.5 and vienna which use ram server. 

i think ashermusic would be able to answer better that question. 

but to stay on topic, the new notation seems as basic as the one in pro tools 8. 
which is cool cause it looks simplier.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 23, 2009)

"That sounds like a bad excuse to me."

If you'd ever met Gerhard Lengeling you'd see right away why I say that he would never make excuses. What he told me years ago is that making it 64-bit would require rewriting the whole program, and there was no reason to do that.

You and I don't care what goes on under the hood, we care about 64-bit memory access, maybe 64-bit plug-ins should they appear, and overall efficiency. If they're able to provide that without rewriting it, we should have no complaints.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 23, 2009)

An overview manual in PDF format:

http://manuals.info.apple.com/en_US/Exp ... _Pro_9.pdf


----------



## mikebarry (Jul 23, 2009)

Regarding Virtualization:

I have everything set to default - does that mean its active? Because once I pass 3.3 GB of Virtual Memory used logic takes a big dump


----------



## synthetic (Jul 23, 2009)

Kinda looks like a point release to me. Maybe I'm just expecting some huge change or people have been asking for these for long enough that they don't seem like news. Or maybe that it's just that L8 is catching up to the rest of the DAWs in many respects. Or perhaps I'm just grumpy sitting in my hotel room in... Kentucky I think. 

Does it support macros yet? Can I make a key command that adds, say, +20 velocity to selected notes? Because I've missed that feature since Studio Vision.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 23, 2009)

Wow, it was about damn time to go refreshing and cleaning up the audio editor ... but apart from all those features I wonder if there will be an easier way to simply cut a snippet and turn it louder or softer by moving a little slider ... I know it might be personal but I really can't dig, why you have to automate a whole track (or general CC07) automation just to alter the volume of a little tiny snippet ...

... Besides that I hope they made it possible to create new audio regions/snippets with just drag while holding the alt key or so ...


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 23, 2009)

mikebarry @ Thu Jul 23 said:


> Regarding Virtualization:
> 
> I have everything set to default - does that mean its active? Because once I pass 3.3 GB of Virtual Memory used logic takes a big dump



When you open the options > Virtual Memory in the EXS24, does it have Active checked?


----------



## mikebarry (Jul 23, 2009)

Yes I do have that "Active" checked - so it is working.
I still frequently run out of space. Once you hit 3.3 in virtual memory it beings a crash fest. 


Yes Alex, the audio stuff in logic is a mess. It doesn't have any audio suite fuction (from PT), the fade window is really weak, it has that recording latency for live monitoring, no tab to transient - I just find it really weak - need to use Pro tools for that stuff.

Hey nice idea with the macros!

PS does anyone use the logic node successfully?


----------



## Toxeen (Jul 23, 2009)

Cool beans !
So much cool new features in the spotlight but - in terms of comfort: doesn't seem like there is a proper multi-render-export feature available (something I love about Cubase 5)


----------



## gsilbers (Jul 23, 2009)

mikebarry @ Thu Jul 23 said:


> Yes I do have that "Active" checked - so it is working.
> I still frequently run out of space. Once you hit 3.3 in virtual memory it beings a crash fest.
> 
> 
> ...




logic now has" bounce in place" with regions and whole tracks which is not audiosuite 
but a nice addition. 
but i am disapointed specially because soundtrack (watever the name is) has it.


----------



## Stevie (Jul 23, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Jul 23 said:


> If you'd ever met Gerhard Lengeling you'd see right away why I say that he would never make excuses. What he told me years ago is that making it 64-bit would require rewriting the whole program, and there was no reason to do that.
> 
> You and I don't care what goes on under the hood, we care about 64-bit memory access, maybe 64-bit plug-ins should they appear, and overall efficiency. If they're able to provide that without rewriting it, we should have no complaints.



Well to be honest, Steinberg rewrote Cubase several times and they made it.
I'm not saying that Cubase 64bit is working great, I heard lots of complains already.
But at least they do it 
Of course there is a reason to do that... the fucking paying customer!


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 23, 2009)

[quote:af574caec7="Stevie @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 11:14 pm"][quote:af574caec7="Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 10:54 pm"]
If you'd ever met Gerhard Lengeling you'd see right away why I say that he would never make excuses. What he told me years ago is that making it 6ò#€   ©æ*#€   ©æ+#€   ©æ,#€   ©æ-#€   ©æ.#€   ©æ/#€   ©æ0#€   ©æ1#€   ©æ2#€   ©æ3#€   ©æ4#€   ©æ5#€   ©æ6#€   ©æ7#€   ©æ8#€   ©æ9#€   ©æ:#€   ©æ;#€   ©æ<#€   ©æ=#€   ©æ>#€   ©æ?#€   ©æ@#€   ©æA#€   ©æB#€   ©æC#€   ©æD#€   ©æE#€   ©æF#€   ©æG#€   ©æH#€   ©æI#€   ©æJ#€   ©æK#€   ©æL#€   ©æM#   ©æN#   ©æO#   ©æP#   ©æQ#   ©æR#   ©æS#   ©æT#   ©æU#   ©æV#   ©æW#   ©æX#   ©æY#   ©æZ#   ©æ[#   ©æ\#   ©æ]#   ©æ^#   ©æ_#   ©æ`#   ©æa#   ©æb#   ©æc#   ©æd#   ©æe#   ©æf#   ©æg#   ©æh#   ©æi#   ©æj#   ©æk#   ©æl#   ©æm#   ©æn#   ©æo#   ©æp#   ©æq#   ©ær#   ©æs#   ©æt#   ©æu#   ©æv#   ©æw#   ©æx#   ©æy#   ©æz#   ©æ{#   ©æ|#   ©æ}#   ©æ~#   ©æ#   ©æ€#   ©æ#   ©æ‚#   ©æƒ#   ©æ„#   ©æ…#   ©æ†#   ©æ‡#   ©æˆ#   ©æ‰#   ©æŠ#   ©æ‹#   ©æŒ#   ©æ#   ©æŽ#   ©æ#   ©æ#   ©æ‘#   ©æ’#   ©æ“#   ©æ”#   ©æ•#   ©æ–#   ©æ—#   ©æ˜#   ©æ™              ò#   ©æ›#   ©æœ#   ©æ#   ©æž#   ©æŸ#   ©æ #   ©æ¡#   ©æ¢#   ©æ£#   ©æ¤#   ©æ¥#   ©æ¦#   ©æ§#   ©æ¨#   ©æ©#   ©æª#   ©æ«#   ©æ¬#   ©æ­#   ©æ®#   ©æ¯#   ©æ°


----------



## david robinson (Jul 23, 2009)

logic is owned by apple.
apple do not care about anything except the bottom line. their shareholders.
logic, under apple is very conservative in development.
nothing like the emagic days.
if everyone can wait until logic pro 13, there might be some "ground-breaking" features that haven't been copied from another DAW.
but who wants to wait around until 2050?
David Robinson.


----------



## LHall (Jul 23, 2009)

I use Logic 8 every day. I have been so very disappointed in Logic 8, I wish I had never "upgraded". The extreme sluggishness - waiting 5-8 seconds for a channel strip preset to open when you have a lot of plugins loaded - drives me nuts. I dislike the inability to shrink the arrange page down to make the screenset I want. 

I like one thing - the ability to drag the mouse down a bunch of tracks at one time to mute them. Otherwise, it seems a lot buggier and less efficient that 7 was. 

Not to mention the fact that installation crashed my whole computer which resulted in having to shell out even more money to get an archive and reinstall done. A bug which has been experienced by a lot of other users, but for which Apple of course will not take responsibility.

Therefore, I'll have to hear some really outstanding reviews from you guys on Logic 9 before I consider shelling out more hard-earned cash for pretty-looking virtual guitar amps. 
:?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 23, 2009)

"apple do not care about anything except the bottom line. their shareholders"

Is that really what you believe, David?

To me as a user it looks like they care deeply about every detail of everything they make, from the initial packaging on. Everything about, say, the iPhone just screams to me that lots of people have poured heart and soul into it.

Besides, it's hard to imagine how anyone could sell $8.34 billion worth of discretionary products in three months in this economy if all they cared about was the bottom line.


----------



## Stevie (Jul 23, 2009)

david robinson @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> logic is owned by apple.
> apple do not care about anything except the bottom line. their shareholders.
> logic, under apple is very conservative in development.
> nothing like the emagic days.
> ...



Absolutely true.


@midphase
Well, if you think I sound like one of those guys, allright.
Logic itself does not address 64bit memory space. It's EXS and
newly Kontakt 3.5. It's basically a workaround Apple introduced. 
But anyway, I worked with Logic loooong ago. The audio engine drove
me nuts...


----------



## SvK (Jul 23, 2009)

What just happened??

Who has it?
Please tell me it's a "stability" release....

Bustin out regions with plug-INS is great!!!
Flex thingy great!

Who has it?

SvK


----------



## ChrisAxia (Jul 23, 2009)

Hi guys,

Well, I've just placed my order, and I really hope that they have fixed the stability issues of Logic 8. I thought was one of the very few that were disappointed with Logic 8, but I see that I am not alone! Thankfully, Logic 7 on the Mac Pro/Leopard has been far more stable than 8 ever was. Let's hope spinning beach-balls and crashes every time I changed a screenset with video have been cured...

~Chris


----------



## mjc (Jul 23, 2009)

Anyone got a spare $5-10,000AUD they can give me? I'm still on a G5...damn expensiveness!! haha


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 24, 2009)

SvK @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> David,
> 
> Music technology has peaked in terms of innovation......when melodyne releases a program that let's you change the notes within a chord of recorded audio; when altiverb let's you place a dry signal convincingly into any room; when guitar rig let's you shred through amps you don't evn own.......when apple releases all of that for 500 bucks, then please tell me what else is left to innovate??
> 
> SvK



Hey Steven,

you know the thing is, all that stuff is of course innovative ... or better, was ... Cubase 4 had all this or even already SX3 the prequel of 4 ... and we are already now months in C5.
When I checked the news of Logic9 I was really happy that they seemingly improved the audio editor ... but all those features are nearly 3-5 years old :/


If I may chime in again because of the audio engine:

- Playback a track ... before you render/bounce it you have to play an empty area like 5-10 times in order to get rid of some long release trails or delays which just continue while playing back (you all know that maybe, tipping the space bar before recording) ... this is just ridiculous, this should NOT happen!

- Sometimes it happens that the audio engine gets errors when I simply have around 5-10 audio tracks going on. Uhm, why can I playback around 50 audio tracks in Cubase with just a single glitch?

- Audio editor is totally rudimentary. You can't even cut out a little audio snippet and raise the volume of that snippet on the fly.

- Not being able to copy by dragging the mouse and holding the alt key. Of course you can but you create an alias. If you e.g. reverse it you also do that to the original file.

- As LHall mentioned, that it takes up to like 3-8 seconds for the plugin list to show up

- The Freeze function is the biggest crap. If I render a freezed tracks I get dropouts, missing notes etc. ... not always but a good portion of it. Why can I render 50 stems AT ONCE in Cubase 5 without having a single glitch, even if a lot of them are freezed?
Besides that I think multitrack export is one of the highlights in C5. I know I can do that too in Logic, but it doesn't keep plugins, the stems distort since it somehow doesn't keep the faders volume etc. ... 


I mean I am aware, in the end it is the mind sitting in front of the computer who is creating the music and not the software itself ... but, well ... Logic for me, is definitely more hype than everything else.


----------



## NYC Composer (Jul 24, 2009)

The Spy vs. Spy sequencer wars never end. I'm a Cubase Mac guy, we have a solo/mute bug that goes back years. We begged for batch export for a decade, JUST got it in C5. DP users have their complaints, Logic users have theirs.

My p.o.v. is that generally, we are recording and mixing on equipment that, had it existed 15 years ago, would have cost a million dollars. What's a decent Logic setup with a Mac Pro now....maybe 5 grand? Essentially unlimited tracks? A good sounding orchestra/rhythm section/bank of synths/drum loop player/awesome sounding effects all in the box with total recall???

For me, stability is the key, day to day workflow issues. I hope you Logic guys get a good update in L9. Peace!


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 24, 2009)

btw, ... sorry if I have missed that somewhere, but there isn't an upgrade price? Just 499?

EDIT: Ah, sorry .. price changes in the store, there you can choose update ... hm 199, still a lot for an "ok" sounding time stretch algo and a few guitar cabinets.


----------



## MrHighlandPark (Jul 24, 2009)

Waywyn @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> - Playback a track ... before you render/bounce it you have to play an empty area like 5-10 times in order to get rid of some long release trails or delays which just continue while playing back (you all know that maybe, tipping the space bar before recording) ... this is just ridiculous, this should NOT happen!


Wow! I am suffering from this problem and I didn't even know it. I was wondering why the very beginning of my bounced tracks have weird artifacts. Thank you!


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 24, 2009)

MrHighlandPark @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> Waywyn @ Fri Jul 24 said:
> 
> 
> > - Playback a track ... before you render/bounce it you have to play an empty area like 5-10 times in order to get rid of some long release trails or delays which just continue while playing back (you all know that maybe, tipping the space bar before recording) ... this is just ridiculous, this should NOT happen!
> ...



No problem, ... I would say you are welcome, but it' actually pretty sad ... 
It's funny when I receive previews and mixes from other composers I can always tell who used Logic, since if it has to go fast you hear artifacts in the beginning :D


----------



## scottbuckley (Jul 24, 2009)

Seriously... you all should just use Sonar and stop whining...  (o)

...waits for flaming...


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 24, 2009)

scottbuckley @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> Seriously... you all should just use Sonar and stop whining...  (o)
> 
> ...waits for flaming...



Hehe, that's what I don't get. Cakewalk guys don't even code for OSX.
... and please noone tell me that Windows is the more multimedia/userfriendly system :D


----------



## david robinson (Jul 24, 2009)

guys,
i've been using logic now since 2000.
recently, i reviewed my work done on the various
versions of this DAW (rhymes with bore).
certainly, to my ear anyway, there is no sonic difference between a track done in LP4, and LP8.
i didn't buy in for elastic audio, or guitar sims.
i was sort of hoping they might find better ways of inputting the data, for instance, and being able to "paint" the music on the screen.
i'm certainly sick of these "upgrades" where i hand over money, and get bloatware.
why do you need elastic audio, if you are a good enough player to do it accurately in the first place?
must be a teenage thing i guess.
David R.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 24, 2009)

From the one-and-only Oscwilde, over at SonikMatter:


> Flex editing is very easy to use, works well, and sounds great - IF YOU make the right choices of algorithm. If you choose Tempophone, Monophonic or Polyphonic - rather than Slicing - on particular audio material, it won't sound as you expect/won't sound "good". In some situations - choosing the "wrong" algorithm may be ideal as a "creative" option.
> 
> Drum replacement/doubling is easy to use - and makes this a 10-30 second task.
> 
> ...


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 24, 2009)

david robinson @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> guys,
> i've been using logic now since 2000.
> recently, i reviewed my work done on the various
> versions of this DAW (rhymes with bore).
> ...



David, I agree with you on that the upgrade "looks" bigger and is more expensive than what you actually get, but I don't get the last phrase you said:

"must be a teenage thing i guess."

I assume you never worked in the remix area, worked with phrased samples, loops or tried to match audio sampletracks to real life orchestra stuff or the other way round?

Time stretch features are not just there to have an amateur fake everything to impress customers or their friends, it is much more than that.

Besides that in the e.g. gameworld, I must be flexible. I prefer an e.g. live played Duduk which is Melodyned and sliced to a certain amount over every sampled one.


----------



## poseur (Jul 24, 2009)

SvK @ Thu Jul 23 said:


> when apple releases all of that for 500 bucks, then please tell me what else is left to innovate??


you seem like a good guy, SvK, and i mean no harm, but.....
dude, that's just _silly_.
???

d


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

NYC Composer:

thanx for your comment  Im hoping for stability as well....

SvK


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 24, 2009)

Everyone is entitled to want what they want. But here is what I can tell you is a fact, not an opinion, as a high profile Logic author and trainer who communicates with tons of pro Logic users: Most of the most asked for top requests of working pros for perceived missing features have been addressed by Logic Pro 9.

A form of Elastic Audio.
A way to bring in Channel Strips from one project to another.
Bounce in Place
Multitrack editing
Audio Quantizing
And so on.

As for 64 bit, as I have posted several times, a couple of years ago Dr. Lengeling told many folks, including me, that he believed that it caused as many problems as it fixed and that there were other, better ways to address more memory for software instruments, etc. He then proved it with the EXS24. And now Native Instruments has proved it with Kontakt 3.5. Snow Leopard should also help with this. So I do not think 64 bit Logic will happen in the not too distant future and that is fine with me. ProTools is not 64 bit, Digital Performer is not 64 bit. Cubase and Sonar are, and I see no evidence that there users are creating better, more professional music any more easily because of it.


----------



## mikebarry (Jul 24, 2009)

The bounce in place seems really really nice. Really Really been missing that one! 
In terms of system performance the more I read this thread the more I want to switch to Cubase! Thanks >8o 

Does anyone have L9?

Is there now anyway to move large groups of tracks in the arrange - or select multiple tracks? Any new sync to movie improvements? Is the FX tails bounce error fixed? So many questions.....


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 24, 2009)

"name me one thing in logic, since apple have owned it, that's truly innovative, groundbreaking and/or that hasn't been copied from another DAW"

That's a totally different subject, David. You said that Apple is only concerned with the bottom line, and that's what I take exception to.

As to original groundbreaking features since Apple bought Logic...well, I don't know that any have been added to any program. Apple has been steadily improving the program in smaller ways, though, and to me those are way more important than the vague groundbreaking features you're looking for. We haven't seen a list of less dramatic improvements in the latest version, but you can count on there being dozens of them.

And that's why I don't agree with Waywyn's pronouncement about Logic's imminent demise. If they were planning on killing it, they wouldn't have been working on it all along.

Again, I'm not saying there aren't many things about Logic that bug the sh out of me every time I use it, nor am I saying that Logic 8 was an improvement in every last way. But it's still an incredible piece of software.

(Which is not to say that all the major DAWs aren't also incredible, because they are.)


----------



## midphase (Jul 24, 2009)

"name me one thing in logic, since apple have owned it, that's truly innovative, groundbreaking and/or that hasn't been copied from another DAW" 


Sculpture most definitely...haven't seen anything like it anywhere else.

Ultrabeat was also pretty revolutionary, only now other companies are matching it with BPM and Maschine.

Delay Designer it's become one of my first goto fx plugins, I haven't encountered anything quite like it.

I'm sure there's more (track freezing was firstly done in Logic, so was track comping).


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

just listened to all the amps on Apple...they sound real good.....not harsh, real warm...

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

poseur....

haha, i like you 2 ...NO, I'm quite serious, apart from the black-box writing the song for you, what else is left to innovate? Name me something....think about it......

My point is Audio on the Computer and all that it entails and then some has been FULLY realised.....

On virtually ALL daws....

The thing to do now is for the DAW guys to focus on work-flow....

SvK


----------



## tmhuud (Jul 24, 2009)

LHall @ Thu Jul 23 said:


> I like one thing - the ability to drag the mouse down a bunch of tracks at one time to mute
> 
> 
> > You can do that L7 as well.


----------



## Colin O'Malley (Jul 24, 2009)

Just installed it here. So far it's waaaay snappier. I think they've really gotten under the hood to make the program truck on mac pros. It feels noticeably smoother and faster. I'm running a big project and have not encountered any problems. Lots of little things have been improved. Love the new group window for example. It basically functions ala Pro Tools now so you can easily hide various groups (eliminating the need for folder tracks which I have always missed from Cubase). Audio buffer handling seems better too, so Alex can FINALLY switch! (I'm just kidding - everybody just stick with the program you know and get back to work!  )

Colin


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 24, 2009)

midphase @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> I'm sure there's more (track freezing was firstly done in Logic, so was track comping).



That was really one feature which made me disappointed like hell. You are JUST able to freeze the track in order to free some CPU and if you use multitimbral instruments you are NOT able to freeze them.

Not everyone may have this following problem, but I know a bunch of guys who can't render freezed tracks. I for instance get loosing samples/dropouts, I even get engine problems and playback interruption by just playing back 5-10 tracks from time to time ... 

What really should be possible is to not only free CPU, but also RAM, as it is possible in Cubase. You have a whole Kontakt 3.5 rack going on with 16 channels of Vio1 articulations, then you go and simply freeze the whole VSTI ... and you have more RAM and CPU to work. I never tested it and there was some kind of bug on C4, but this could have been just a rare personal one, but literally you could setup a template of like 50GB ... you just create a template by inserting a track and freeze one e.g. Kontakt instance after another. If you load up your template all tracks show up as freezed ... if you want to start working, you hit unfreeze on e.g. Violas and start working. Then if you encounter problems with RAM you could start hitting the freeze button again and unfreeze the choir sections etc.
To be honest I didn't have time to try that in a big template, since I am too busy currently, but I think it is a cool way to work, since you may have your orchestra going on, ... but have the choir or full additional percussion section already loaded - freezed, but all setup, routed and bussed as you prefer.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 24, 2009)

Colin O'Malley @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> ... so Alex can FINALLY switch! (I'm just kidding - everybody just stick with the program you know and get back to work!  )
> 
> Colin




Hahah, good one ... but you are right in a way. I experienced that it is good to be able to work on both platforms (or even more).
I recently encountered the situation where I was asked on what sequencer I can work.
I said: "What would you like me to work on" ... and the guys said: "Is Logic cool?" ... I just said: "Yes"


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

ORDERED!!!

wooohooo...

Thanx for info Colin O'Manley 

SvK


----------



## gsilbers (Jul 24, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> Everyone is entitled to want what they want. But here is what I can tell you is a fact, not an opinion, as a high profile Logic author and trainer who communicates with tons of pro Logic users: Most of the most asked for top requests of working pros for perceived missing features have been addressed by Logic Pro 9.
> 
> A form of Elastic Audio.
> A way to bring in Channel Strips from one project to another.
> ...








what are the differences b/w bounce in place and "audiosuite"? 
and what do you think is better or how woud u use bounce in place.


----------



## midphase (Jul 24, 2009)

"You are JUST able to freeze the track in order to free some CPU and if you use multitimbral instruments you are NOT able to freeze them. "

I'm sorry but using multi-timbral instruments in logic is equivalent to buying a car (a sporty one at that), and then tying a horse to the front of it and getting it pulled. It just doesn't make any sense no which way you look at it. Logic is incredibly efficient and advanced in handling tons of instances of plugins, the CPU and Memory payoff is negligible and greatly outweighed by the advantages.

Anyone who insists on working with multi-timbral instances in Logic simply deserves what they get!


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

"what are the differences b/w bounce in place and "audiosuite"? 
and what do you think is better or how woud u use bounce in place."

You can bounce with a whole chain of plugs in a row...

SvK


----------



## madbulk (Jul 24, 2009)

What's KOOL is checking "free 5-7 days shipping," or whatever it was, and having it show up the next day in spite of my cheap ass.
What's IRONIC is that if only I had 50gb free on my system drive I could find out how much snappier it is. But we'll see when the new 500GB drive shows up after I check "free and slow" again! Maybe 9.1 will be out by then.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 24, 2009)

midphase @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> "You are JUST able to freeze the track in order to free some CPU and if you use multitimbral instruments you are NOT able to freeze them. "
> 
> I'm sorry but using multi-timbral instruments in logic is equivalent to buying a car (a sporty one at that), and then tying a horse to the front of it and getting it pulled. It just doesn't make any sense no which way you look at it. Logic is incredibly efficient and advanced in handling tons of instances of plugins, the CPU and Memory payoff is negligible and greatly outweighed by the advantages.
> 
> Anyone who insists on working with multi-timbral instances in Logic simply deserves what they get!



Hays is right, Alex.With the exception of perhaps something like Stylus RMX where because it is drums and is not all that CPU intensive, and makes sense to assign the outputs to auxes for FX and automate those, there are too many distinct disadvantages to using things like Kontakt and Play based libraries multi-timbrally in Logic.

1. Everything in the multi is handled by 1 core.

2. You cannot do all the cc stuff on the MIDI channels without the AU going cuckoo for Cocoa puffs. .

3. You cannot freeze it, as Alex noted.

The multi-timbral paradigm in most cases is a workflow habit from the tone module days that at least in Logic is better off avoided.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 24, 2009)

> what are the differences b/w bounce in place and "audiosuite"?
> and what do you think is better or how woud u use bounce in place



SvK says you can bounce a whole chain, and that's cool if you need to use it. But this is exactly the same concept as AudioSuite processing, and it's one of the things that's made Pro Tools such a great production tool.

If you run into, say, a piano thud, it's much easier just to highlight it in the waveform display, roll off everything below about 100Hz with an EQ, and process it in place using an AudioSuite plug-in than it is to insert a processor and automate turning it on and off. Other than perhaps putting in a short crossfade, you're done.

That's been my biggest complaint about Logic compared to Pro Tools all along: you can't just on the waveform and then hit to spacebar to hear whether you're in the right place - you have to click in the ruler above (or open it in the waveform editor...no thanks). The + tool only works on a region - you can't just click and play.

I couldn't tell from the video whether they've changed that or not.


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

MidPhase / Asher......

Are you saying within Logic working with a multi instance of Kontakt is bad?

Or a multi instance of UltraBeat is bad?

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

ok so I am better off running 16 seperate instances of Kontakt Channel Strips than using one Kontakt multi with Auxes?? You guys are sure about this?

Not that it matters much to me, as I don't host ANY of that stuff within Logic anymore.....ALL outside the box for me......Song switching is such a joy 

SvK


----------



## midphase (Jul 24, 2009)

I'm saying that any multi-timbral usage in Logic is a poor choice...especially Kontakt!

Multiple instances of plugins, each assigned a signe instrument is good!

Believe me, when I went from DP to Logic, my brain was going into a tailspin as well...but after I ran tests and realized that the difference in CPU was minimal, I saw the light and never looked back!


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jul 24, 2009)

Colin O'Malley said:


> Love the *new group window* for example. It basically functions ala Pro Tools now so you can easily *hide various groups (eliminating the need for folder tracks* which I have always missed from Cubase).



Does this also hide the tracks of the group in the Arrange Page? That would be great. 

.


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

midphase / asher....thanx for info!....I had no idea......

SvK


----------



## JT3_Jon (Jul 24, 2009)

SvK @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> Not that it matters much to me, as I don't host ANY of that stuff within Logic anymore.....ALL outside the box for me......Song switching is such a joy
> 
> SvK



What are you using? Bidule on the same computer, or multiple computers. Do you plan on using VE Pro when its released instead? Just curious.


----------



## JT3_Jon (Jul 24, 2009)

midphase @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> I'm saying that any multi-timbral usage in Logic is a poor choice...especially Kontakt!



What about something like omnisphere?


----------



## Colin O'Malley (Jul 24, 2009)

Finding a few other things that aren't listed prominently on the apple site:

Fade tool is completely redesigned. You can morph the size, curves and placement of the fade without going to the fader parameters in the upper left corner. 

You CAN gain individual regions, non-destructively now. There is a gain setting for each region in the parameters in the upper left. 

Groups behave just like Pro Tools, way more powerful than they used to be. You can hide/unhide by clicking a check box in the group page. It's exactly what we need to deal with massive templates. No more using Logic's old folder tracks (sorry I've always thought they were extremely clunky). You can open the group page with an icon on the tool bar. 

You can bounce in place a complete track, an individual region or multiple regions. You have a detailed dialogue that lets you replace your original track with the new audio track, or simply mute the original and place a new audio track right below it. All plugins can either be rendered or excluded. All sends and routing are copied to the new track. In my mind this all works exactly as I always wanted it to. 

Tons of new key commands. 

Graphics are significantly faster. For example, previously when I did a global insert of bars across all my tracks (hundred of midi tracks with lots of regions) it would take Logic a few seconds to process it all. Now it's pretty much instant. 

Audio buffers are optimized, I don't understand how. They just work better. 

Midi chase is fixed completely on sustained notes. Maybe I'm the only one who thought it was broken, but it's driven me nuts for years.

Video is working better. I don't know how or why. 

Does Apple post a list of what they've done in detail anywhere? 

Colin


----------



## david robinson (Jul 24, 2009)

i'm supposing that my my request for painting audio is a little too radical for a company
like apple.
maybe when they get touch screens together, i'll be happier.
i hate having a musical idea that has taken only seconds to think of, take hours to implement, and i'm talking all DAW's, not just Logic. (which i love, anyway).
best to you all,
i'm humbled.
David R.


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

JT3 :

no plogue.....4 instances of" Vienna Ensemble 2" piping into Logic8 over soundflower (there is info online on how to expand soundflower to however many channels you need, worx great)

2 instances of Kontakt multis piping back into logic also via soundflower......

All on one machine.....simply copy the kontakt app and rename it......all of the apps are rinnin stand- alone NOT with any hosts.....ZERO issues.

Best,

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 24, 2009)

Colin,

thanx for the details, those fixes sound great!! Workflow is finally being addressed.... No crashes? No issues yet?

Thanx Ohh'Manley 

SvK


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 25, 2009)

midphase @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> "You are JUST able to freeze the track in order to free some CPU and if you use multitimbral instruments you are NOT able to freeze them. "
> 
> I'm sorry but using multi-timbral instruments in logic is equivalent to buying a car (a sporty one at that), and then tying a horse to the front of it and getting it pulled. It just doesn't make any sense no which way you look at it. Logic is incredibly efficient and advanced in handling tons of instances of plugins, the CPU and Memory payoff is negligible and greatly outweighed by the advantages.
> 
> Anyone who insists on working with multi-timbral instances in Logic simply deserves what they get!



I agree with you 100% here. Thing is, coming from Cubase I just tried it, noticed that it doesn't work out and that you are better off with using single instance for each instrument. That's it.

I just mentioned it along with the freezing. You can free up CPU but not RAM ... AND you have to use single instances. If you work in Cubase you can freeze and it free's up CPU AND RAM ... and it doesn't matter if you have multiple channels going on or just a single instance for a single instrument.

For me it is a bit like, you drive in a car alone and can use the air condition ... then you pick up three more guys and it's been deactivated!?


----------



## snowleopard (Jul 25, 2009)

I find myself in the majority here. I don't see myself using the speaker cabinets, or much else here. The coolest, and I think least understood or used feature in Logic 8 was Sculpture. But it appears nothing new is like that in L9. 

Logic has a problem with a 4gb ceiling as I understand it, thus the crashes in ESX (or Kontakt for that matter), has that been remedied? I mean, if I have 16gb of RAM, will Logic access that? All of the EWQL Play plugs are 64bit, as is Altiverb. Why not Logic? 

It seems to me that yes, Soundtrack has easier audio editing for the most common uses. 

I also would like to have seen CC MIDI data being able to easily accessed for automation the way volume/panning etc. is. Right now, it seems like too many extra steps. Though yes, I realize that MIDI is not the same as volume. Still, looking at Cubase 5, they seem to have made it most accessible under a lesser amount of mouse work. 

This really seems like a cosmetic upgrade to me, with some goodies some of you might use, but I likely won't. So It's still Logic 8 for me. 

The thing that sucks is that I jumped from Cubase 2 to Logic 7 because of all the problems I had with Cubase, and mostly the window clutter, which is really nice in 8. But Mackie Tracktion had it figured out before Apple. Now, it looks like the tide is shifting back away from Logic. I'm definitely no expert and could be wrong on some of these things. Hopefully I am wrong and there's more to 9 than meets the eye, or when 10 comes out in a year or two it will knock my socks off.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 25, 2009)

I think you mention some good thing here, which are the main problem of especially older Cubase versions. Cubase back then was crap ... I remember the old VST32 versions and it just went "pro" with SX1 etc. ... now with C5 it is one of the best sequencers out there, since everything is intuitive and easy to use.

Lots of people like Logic since ever ... but what most keep forgetting is that Cubase has grown big time (in terms of features and usability) ... I have a buddy who still thinks that folder tracks in Logic are the best thing ever ... then I asked him if he knows how Cubase does handle it ... and he didn't even know that Cubase had folders because he just knows versions 3.65 from 10 years ago :D


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Jul 25, 2009)

I don't quite understand how using single instances of multitimbral plugins could be a good thing... given that Logic isn't 64bit, having 10, 15, 25 wrappers of plugins like Kontakt 3, Omnisphere, Trilogy or Stylus RMX seems like it would easily eat through all your RAM even if you're not loading any instruments. What about orchestral templates where you could need 60-70 instances of Kontakt? Doesn't that seem a bit absurd?


----------



## mikebarry (Jul 25, 2009)

Hey Alex,

How is the transition to Cubase from logic? 

Thanks to everyone posting cool info about the new version.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 25, 2009)

snowleopard @ Sat Jul 25 said:


> This really seems like a cosmetic upgrade to me, with some goodies some of you might use, but I likely won't. So It's still Logic 8 for me.



I have no problem with someone preferring Cubase to Logic.
I have no problem with someone saying Logic Pro 9 is merely Apple catching up.
I have no problem with someone saying the new features un LP9 are not what they want or need.

I have a BIG problem with someone saying they are cosmetic because it simply isn't true.

Bounce in Place, Selective Track Importing, Flex Too and Flex editingl, Audio Quantizing, Multitrack Editing for Drums, Varispeed, a Drum Replacer, etc. are not merely cosmetic, they are important workflow features that were on most pros top 20 wish list.

When LP8 came out, there as a big hue and cry that "Apple has dumbed down Logic for newbies and does not care about the wishes of its long time pro users."

I have a lot of issues with Apple but it is undeniable to any reasonable person that with LP9 Apple has put the lie to that.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 25, 2009)

[quote:4bf73516e7="zircon_st @ Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:03 am"]I don't quite understand how using single instances of multitimbral plugins could be a good thing... given that Logic isn't 64bit, having 10, 15, 25 wrappers of plugins like Kontakt 3, Omnisphere, Trilogy or Stylus RMX seems like it would eò$1   ª^$1   ª_$1   ª`$1   ªa$1   ªb$1   ªc$1   ªd$1   ªe$1   ªf$1   ªg$1   ªh$1   ªi$1   ªj$1   ªk$1   ªl$1   ªm$1   ªn$1   ªo$1   ªp$1   ªq$1   ªr$1   ªs$1   ªt$1   ªu$1   ªv$1   ªw$1   ªx$1   ªy$1   ªz$1   ª{$1   ª|$1   ª}$1   ª~$1   ª$1   ª€$1   ª$1   ª‚$1   ªƒ$1   ª„$1   ª…$1   ª†$1   ª‡$1   ªˆ$1   ª‰$1   ªŠ$1   ª‹$1   ªŒ$1   ª$1   ªŽ$1   ª$1   ª$1   ª‘$1   ª’$1   ª“$1   ª”$1   ª•$1   ª–$1   ª—$1   ª˜$1   ª™$1   ªš$1   ª›$1   ªœ$1   ª$1   ªž$1   ªŸ$1   ª $1   ª¡$1   ª¢$1   ª£$1   ª¤$1   ª¥$1   ª¦$1   ª§$1   ª¨$1   ª©$1   ªª$1   ª«$1   ª¬$1   ª­$1   ª®$1   ª¯$1   ª°$1   ª±$1   ª²$1   ª³$1   ª´$1   ªµ$1   ª¶$1   ª·$1   ª¸$1   ª¹$1   ªº$1   ª»$1   ª¼$1   ª½$1   ª¾$1   ª¿$1   ªÀ$1   ªÁ$1   ªÂ$1   ªÃ$1   ªÄ$1   ªÅ$1   ªÆ$1   ªÇ$1   ªÈ$1   ªÉ$1   ªÊ$1   ªË$1   ªÌ$1   ªÍ              ò$1   ªÏ$1   ªÐ$1   ªÑ$1   ªÒ$1   ªÓ$1   ªÔ$1   ªÕ$1   ªÖ$1   ª×$1   ªØ$1   ªÙ$1   ªÚ$1   ªÛ$1   ªÜ$1   ªÝ$1   ªÞ$1   ªß$1   ªà$1   ªá$1   ªâ$1   ªã$1   ªä$1   ªå$1   ªæ$1   ªç$1   ªè$1   ªé$1   ªê$1   ªë$1   ªì$1   ªí$2   ªü$2   ªý$2   ªþ$2   ªÿ$2   ª $2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª	$2   ª
$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª $2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2   ª$2


----------



## drasticmeasures (Jul 25, 2009)

My experience is that it simply makes more sense to have a separate instance for every instrument in K3.

However, I find it is more economical to use all 8 channels of a spectrasonics plug before loading another one. Otherwise, combined with a bunch of midi data, 3 or 4 altiverbs on busses, and depending on your "undo" settings, Logic get very buggy and sluggish very quickly. (just my experience). 
I suspect Logic going 64bit would solve this problem. My opinion is that the features in Logic are getting too great - maintaining all that function memory, not to mention GRAPHIC memory (the first thing to go south for me) - to not investigate 64bit.

I'm inclined to agree that a 64bit Cubase composer is not going to write better music than a Logic user, but they are probably going to curse less.


----------



## LFO (Jul 25, 2009)

midphase @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> "You are JUST able to freeze the track in order to free some CPU and if you use multitimbral instruments you are NOT able to freeze them. "
> 
> I'm sorry but using multi-timbral instruments in logic is equivalent to buying a car (a sporty one at that), and then tying a horse to the front of it and getting it pulled. It just doesn't make any sense no which way you look at it. Logic is incredibly efficient and advanced in handling tons of instances of plugins, the CPU and Memory payoff is negligible and greatly outweighed by the advantages.
> 
> Anyone who insists on working with multi-timbral instances in Logic simply deserves what they get!



[EDIT] Nevermind, I read the replies above and now understand this has to do with spreading VIs across multiple CPUs. If only my iMac had multiple CPUs. :shock: 

Ok, I'm confused. You are talking about working with multi-timbral plug-ins like Kontakt or OmniSphere where I can load several instruments in the same instance and control them via separate MIDI channels while routing the output through multiple audio channels? If so, why would this be a bad thing? Or are you talking about something completely different?

-Kevin


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 25, 2009)

Nathan Furst @ Sat Jul 25 said:


> t investigate 64bit.
> 
> I'm inclined to agree that a 64bit Cubase composer is not going to write better music than a Logic user, but they are probably going to curse less.



Not true they are just cursing at different things. Check out the thread on Gearslutz.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 25, 2009)

LFO @ Sat Jul 25 said:


> midphase @ Fri Jul 24 said:
> 
> 
> > "You are JUST able to freeze the track in order to free some CPU and if you use multitimbral instruments you are NOT able to freeze them. "
> ...



Kevin, did you read my post where I explain specifically what is wrong with it?


----------



## LFO (Jul 25, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sat Jul 25 said:


> LFO @ Sat Jul 25 said:
> 
> 
> > midphase @ Fri Jul 24 said:
> ...



Yes, I had not finished reading the thread when I quoted the post and replied to it. Thanks for the info!

-Kevin


----------



## JT3_Jon (Jul 25, 2009)

Colin O'Malley @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> Midi chase is fixed completely on sustained notes. Maybe I'm the only one who thought it was broken, but it's driven me nuts for years.



You're not the only one who had problems with midi chase, not just on sustained notes, but sus pedal and midi CC's as well! It seemed to work fine (for the most part) if you used midi channel 1, but all other midi channels would not chase midi CC / sustain events!! Hopefully this has been fixed in L9.

Thank you very much Colin for breaking down some of the new features! Its very much appreciated!!


----------



## drasticmeasures (Jul 25, 2009)

Hey Colin - 
Found this list, but I don't think it's _everything_.

New features 
Logic Pro 9: 
Flex Time (Elastic Audio equivalent) 
Audio Quantize 
Bounce in Place 
Selective Track Import (choose media, plug-ins, i/o, sends, etc...) 
Drum Tracks Editing 
Speed Fades (Turntable-style start and stop) 
Auto-conform tempo when importing audio 
Varispeed 
Drum Replacer 
Editing within Take Folders 
Possibility to assign a channel strip to multiple groups 
Channel Strips now have a mono output option 
Track Notes in the Mixer 
Notes area in Media/Lists area (can display Project/Track notes) 
Control Surface bars in the Mixer 
Convert Audio Region to Sampler Instrument 
Freeze tracks: source only (before plug-ins) or pre-fader (after plug-ins) 
Guitar Chord grids with hammer-on, pull-off, bends notation 
Amp Designer 
Pedalboard 
Space Designer Warped Effects 
All 6 Jam Packs (including newer "Voices" Jam Pack) 
New Gain parameter for Audio Regions 
Individual scaling of plug-in windows (100%, 125%, 150%, 175% or 200%) 
Set the number of backups directly from Logic 
Choose the default Stereo Output so it no longer automatically generates 1-2 every time you create a new track. Also with a mirroring option. 
Auto-Colorize Takes, will change the colors automatically of every sequential take wile recording. 
Pointer Tool has preferences to also act as Fade (when over the top left or right corner of a region) or Marquee tool (when over the lower half of a region). 
Export/Import Markers to Audio File 
Quick Look picture of Logic Projects 
Play button has new modes: Play Marquee Selection/Cycle/From Selected Region/From Last Locate Position. 
Stop button has new modes: Jump Between Marquee/Last Locate Position/Cycle/Selected Region and Project Start if stopped. 
Cycle button has new modes: automatically set the Locators by Selection whenever a new Marquee/Region/Note selection is created 
Zoom to fit All Contents key command 
Region Parameter box as a floating area 
Nudge by 1 or 10ms 
Logic 9 is a Universal Binary release, although it is officially not supported on PPC


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 25, 2009)

Thanks a lot Nathan! 8)


----------



## timkiel (Jul 25, 2009)

Interesting last line that Logic 9 is UB only not officially supported on PPCs. Anyone care to try?

Seems like an overhead producing a UB version. That said this probably infers that UBs will run on Snow Leopard with no problems - assuming that L9 does indeed work on Snow Leopard without a patch.


----------



## Przemek K. (Jul 25, 2009)

So many choices so little time...Logic, Cubase, Sonar, which one has more or the better features,
which one is more stable on which OS and on Mac or PC?

Who cares? 

Here comes - Microsofts- "Brand NEW" 
" S O N G S M I T H "


http://www.logicstudioblog.com/2009/01/microsoft-launches-garageband-killer.html


o :twisted:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 25, 2009)

"Pointer Tool has preferences to also act as Fade (when over the top left or right corner of a region) or Marquee tool (when over the lower half of a region)"

Can someone who has L9 tell me whether you can now locate the cursor by clicking with the Marquee tool instead of selecting a region with it?


----------



## SvK (Jul 25, 2009)

Nick


+1

SvK


----------



## Colin O'Malley (Jul 25, 2009)

Nick, 

Yes. If you click anywhere with the marquee tool it will play from that point - whether you select a region or not. You can set it all up to perform a lot like the PT multi tool and play from cursor. 

Colin


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 25, 2009)

That's a great improvement. Thanks Colin.


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Jul 25, 2009)

I am running a sequence and have crashed now more times than i can remember. There are so many combinations when I am working that are causing me to crash I have lost count....it is just plain unstable. I will be going back to 8 after i finish composing this cue....if i finish.

edit...my problem may be a K2 K3 memory compatible issue...I'll keep you updated on this post.

I removed my K2 instance and just ran K3 and was stable. I had this behavior in L8 when running the 2 side by side so dealt with that first and I think it solved the issue.


----------



## SvK (Jul 25, 2009)

Craig.....

Yikes.....

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 25, 2009)

Colin....tell us what 3d party stuff you are running within L9 , you seem to be stable.....

thanx,

SvK


----------



## Craig Sharmat (Jul 25, 2009)

as stated above I think it is K2 and K3 issue.


----------



## SvK (Jul 25, 2009)

Craig,

gotcha...thanx!

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 25, 2009)

Guys...these amps / cabs sound awesome........
http://www.apple.com/logicstudio/whats-new/

Click on the video of "Amp Designer" and watch it.....Then watch "PedalBoard" video

then go back to "Amp Designer" and click the blue link HearIt Now ....

man...

SvK


----------



## SvK (Jul 26, 2009)

Concerning the new amps / cabs in L9:

http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2093927&tstart=0 (http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jsp ... 7&amp;tstart=0)

SvK


----------



## Hal (Jul 26, 2009)

Never used Logic but i was always impressed by the number of available features and addons
lot of high quality plugins,sampler,convolution and now guitar cabinet
i love my cubase but why does Logic offer so much stuff in the box !?


----------



## Colin O'Malley (Jul 26, 2009)

I'm running fine here with Kontakt 3.5 I did notice that certain plugs reset themselves in my existing Logic 8 template opened in 9. For example, EXS Vienna performance legato tool had to be re-selected. That makes sense that Craig ran into some memory issues with Kontakt. Probably same sort of transfer issues. Maybe just resetting memory settings in Kontakt will cover it? I'm not sure, Kontakt has been fine here. I have heard of one other problem from a Logic user opening a large Logic 8 session (using his old template). I have not heard any problems (yet) with session began in Logic 9. 

Colin


----------



## LHall (Jul 26, 2009)

I've had a lot of crashing problems after recently moving to L8. But they did reduce quite a lot when I created a brand new template in L8 instead of continuing to use the one ported from L7. 

Perhaps its a good idea to just do this automatically anytime a new build comes out once you've finished working on projects started in the previous version.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 26, 2009)

[quote:3632d868e8="LHall @ Sun Jul 26, 2009 1:37 pm"]I've had a lot of crashing problems after recently moving to L8. But they did reduce quite a lot when I created a ò$Ÿ   ª72$Ÿ   ª73$Ÿ   ª74$Ÿ   ª75$Ÿ   ª76$Ÿ   ª77$Ÿ   ª78$Ÿ   ª79$Ÿ   ª7:$Ÿ   ª7;$Ÿ   ª7<$Ÿ   ª7=$Ÿ   ª7>$Ÿ   ª7?$Ÿ   ª[email protected]$Ÿ   ª7A$Ÿ   ª7B$Ÿ   ª7C$Ÿ   ª7D$Ÿ   ª7E$Ÿ   ª7F$Ÿ   ª7G$Ÿ   ª7H$Ÿ   ª7I$    ª7J$    ª7K$    ª7L$    ª7M$    ª7N$    ª7O$    ª7P$    ª7Q$    ª7R$    ª7S$    ª7T$    ª7U$    ª7V$    ª7W$    ª7X$    ª7Y$    ª7Z$    ª7[$    ª7\$    ª7]$    ª7^$    ª7_$    ª7`$    ª7a$    ª7b$    ª7c$    ª7d$    ª7e$    ª7f$    ª7g$    ª7h$    ª7i$    ª7j$    ª7k$    ª7l$    ª7m$    ª7n$    ª7o$    ª7p$    ª7q$    ª7r$    ª7s$    ª7t$    ª7u$    ª7v$    ª7w$    ª7x$    ª7y$    ª7z$    ª7{$    ª7|$    ª7}$    ª7~$    ª7$    ª7€$    ª7$¡   ª7‚$¡   ª7ƒ$


----------



## John DeBorde (Jul 26, 2009)

I'm about to do the install and am wondering if I need to upgrade the jam pack content? I have the voices one already, so I think I have it all except the GB 09 stuff.

thanks!!
john


----------



## mikebarry (Jul 26, 2009)

Wow this box is small! No user manual :( PDF's only


----------



## Jack Weaver (Jul 26, 2009)

*• Assign Core Audio Inputs and Outputs separately.*

If Im right I think what is means is that you don't need to make an aggregate device anymore unless you are using interfaces additive.

So I would imagine you guys who have m-Audio proFire 32's (or whatever they're called) can now legitimately use them for tons of extra hardware i/o when using Plogue Bidule or standalone vi's on the desktop!

.


----------



## SvK (Jul 26, 2009)

Call me a leftie.....but let's save some trees!!

Long live the online manual!

SvK


----------



## gsilbers (Jul 26, 2009)

timkiel @ Sat Jul 25 said:


> Interesting last line that Logic 9 is UB only not officially supported on PPCs. Anyone care to try?
> 
> Seems like an overhead producing a UB version. That said this probably infers that UBs will run on Snow Leopard with no problems - assuming that L9 does indeed work on Snow Leopard without a patch.



snow leopard will only run on mac intels. seems lp9 works on PPC but apple wont help you out if u need help if something goes wrong. 
i bealive someone at gearslutz.com used it in its ppc mac g5 and many issues. 
u shoudl check over there.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Jul 27, 2009)

> No, because on a multicore machine, the key to maximizing its potential is to spread the load throughout the cores.
> 
> WIth Omnisphere it probably does not make sense, but with Kontakt based and Play instruments you will get better CPU power. East West goes so far as to recommend it with Logic.
> 
> ...



I understand the reasoning behind it a bit better, but I still don't quite see how this is at all efficient. It still seems very backwards. If you are using keyswitched patches you can't, say, automate the volume of one articulation w/o messing up the volume of another. You can't do any individual mixing between parts. Not to mention many libraries do not have keyswitched patches, particularly if you're mixing and matching libraries.

60-70 Kontakt instruments seems to me not just possible but extremely likely... I don't write a great deal of large-scale orchestral music, but when I do, I easily rack up a huge amount of instruments. For example, most typically I have anywhere from 10 to 20 percussive patches from different libraries. Logic would thus require 10-20 instances of Kontakt 3...?

Maybe it's just the way I work, but CPU for me is almost never a problem. My "lowly" Q9450 quad core PC rarely has any problems with playback even in larger projects. However, I do very often max out my RAM with 32-bit Windows XP, so I'm always interested in solutions for that (I do have XP64 as well which I don't use regularly for a variety of reasons.)


----------



## midphase (Jul 27, 2009)

"I understand the reasoning behind it a bit better, but I still don't quite see how this is at all efficient. It still seems very backwards. "

Don't knock it till you try it. The Multi-Timbral set up feels very backwards and oh so 1997 to me!

Logic's way is so powerful that I find it inconceivable to go back and work any other way!


----------



## spectrum (Jul 27, 2009)

midphase @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> "You are JUST able to freeze the track in order to free some CPU and if you use multitimbral instruments you are NOT able to freeze them. "
> 
> I'm sorry but using multi-timbral instruments in logic is equivalent to buying a car (a sporty one at that), and then tying a horse to the front of it and getting it pulled. It just doesn't make any sense no which way you look at it. Logic is incredibly efficient and advanced in handling tons of instances of plugins, the CPU and Memory payoff is negligible and greatly outweighed by the advantages.
> 
> Anyone who insists on working with multi-timbral instances in Logic simply deserves what they get!


That's not necessarily the case.

Complex instruments like Omnisphere and Stylus RMX (and others) work MUCH better in Logic when used multitimbrally. If you open an instance for each part you are wasting a lot of RAM and CPU efficiency. Being able to share effects between parts within a single plug-in is really important too.

The smarter way to work with something like Omnisphere is to open a couple of multitimbral instances, so the CPU load is spread to multicores, but each musical part is being used more efficiently and has all the advantages of the multitimbral enviroment way of working:

• Common interface

• Realtime live switching and stacking of parts

• Shared FX for better CPU efficiency

• Less RAM overhead

So the fact that Logic, Garageband and Mainstage are not very friendly to multitimbral instruments can indeed be problematic in a lot of scenarios. It would be great if the freezing worked multitimbrally.

There's benefits to both approaches. (single timbral vs multitimbral) I find it works well to use the best approach for the instrument.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 27, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Fri Jul 24 said:


> Kays is right, Alex. With the exception of perhaps something like Stylus RMX where because it is drums and is not all that CPU intensive, and makes sense to assign the outputs to auxes for FX and automate those, there are too many distinct disadvantages to using things like Kontakt and Play based libraries multi-timbrally in Logic.
> 
> 1. Everything in the multi is handled by 1 core.


True. This is why it's good to use a couple of multitimbral Omnisphere instances in Logic to spread the load around.



> 2. You cannot do all the cc stuff on the MIDI channels without the AU going cuckoo for Cocoa puffs.


That's not the case in my experience. I've done extremely complex cc stuff multitimbrally with no problems in Logic.



> 3. You cannot freeze it, as Alex noted.


This is a Logic problem though, only because the Apple/Emagic guys don't like the multitimbral approach.



> The multi-timbral paradigm in most cases is a workflow habit from the tone module days that at least in Logic is better off avoided.


But when you look at how much better multi-timbral instruments are handled in almost all the other hosts, I think it's really a shame that Logic doesn't work as well....since it is so excellent in so many other ways.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 27, 2009)

zircon_st @ Sat Jul 25 said:


> I don't quite understand how using single instances of multitimbral plugins could be a good thing... given that Logic isn't 64bit, having 10, 15, 25 wrappers of plugins like Kontakt 3, Omnisphere, Trilogy or Stylus RMX seems like it would easily eat through all your RAM even if you're not loading any instruments.


That's correct Andrew...and it's how a lot of Logic users get themselves into trouble too! 

Until Logic is fully 64-bit, the best thing to do with multitimbral instruments is to use a combination approach, where you do some load spreading of a couple of instances - and then use each of those instruments multitimbrally.

Then you'll get the benefits of the CPU multicore spreading AND you'll be using your RAM much more efficiently.

When everything is fully 64 bit, then using loads of individual Omnisphere's and RMX's will work fine....until then, there are more advantages to the combination approach.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 27, 2009)

Nathan Furst @ Sat Jul 25 said:


> My experience is that it simply makes more sense to have a separate instance for every instrument in K3.
> 
> However, I find it is more economical to use all 8 channels of a spectrasonics plug before loading another one. Otherwise, combined with a bunch of midi data, 3 or 4 altiverbs on busses, and depending on your "undo" settings, Logic get very buggy and sluggish very quickly. (just my experience).
> I suspect Logic going 64bit would solve this problem. My opinion is that the features in Logic are getting too great - maintaining all that function memory, not to mention GRAPHIC memory (the first thing to go south for me) - to not investigate 64bit.
> ...


Well said!

64-bit Logic will be able to have the same excellent performance with large sessions of lots of plug-ins that it currently does with smaller sessions with less plug-ins.

Each third party plug-in instanced uses RAM, which is precious in 32-bit hosts - so it's important to conserve it in 32 bit environments. When hosts get close to the RAM limit, they tend to not work too well.

64-bit hosts and plug-ins will really improve this situation.


----------



## midphase (Jul 28, 2009)

"They feel that they have more control over the individual parameters if it remains as a single instance. But there are work-a-rounds"

The problem is that those workarounds end up costing you RAM also...so at the end of it, you're back to square one.

I actually tend to disagree with Eric, the RAM cost of running separate instances is quite minimal in the grand scheme of things. The bottom line is that I have yet to have any issues from having too many instances of a particular plugin. (Actually, the only issue that I'm having with a plugin happens to be with Spectrasonic's Trilogy wrapper).

I'm not saying that Eric doesn't know what he's talking about, what I'm saying is that the RAM cost might not be as extensive as his post suggests.

If someone can show in an objective test that running multi-timbral instances (along with all of the necessary workarounds to obtain the same degree of control over each instrument) saves RAM and/or CPU resources, then I'll shut up about it. But until now nobody has stepped up to the plate, and the tests that I have run myself have resulted in the differences being negligible at best!

I have been using Logic in this manner for almost 8 years, from a 1ghz G4 to my current Mac Pro. It has never stopped me from being able to deliver the scores that I have worked on, or realize the vision of the music that I had in my head.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

See, this is just what baffles me a bit. There is a program where you have to follow certain rules to get the best workflow, while Cubase simply offers everything :mrgreen: 

I mean you have instrument tracks, you have the vst rack setup. The coolest thing as I mentioned before is that you can freeze whole racks, so you can literally have a setup of 10 to 50Gb in size of instruments (e.g. besides K3.5 which uses it's own memory server) ...

... I know I know, you would say: "Then why the fuck you don't stay with your stupid Cubase and leave us alone" :D ... but the thing I am trying to say is, why is THE ultimatesuperduperdefaultstandardultraineverystudio sequencer so limited in functions ... and best is, why it announces features which are as you would announce the air condition to be something revolutionary?!?

My bet is and now you can beat me to death: There will be NO Logic 10.
Why I am saying this?
1. Because the way how Apple treats and sells Logic and
2. If you see development curves of other sequencers compared to Logic during the years it's like a day and night difference.

But anyway, I seem to get the upgrade too only to be compatible to other studios and guys.


----------



## midphase (Jul 28, 2009)

Alex,

With all due respek...

I bet if I started using Cubase, there would be a ton of things that would bug me about it and would cause me to say "why can't Cubase do this???"

Also...last time I checked, DP was practically ripping off all of the Logic 8 innovations and not bringing anything to the table.

I'll give you that Pro Tools has been very very aggressive in turning up the heat on their MIDI stuff....but I think that's vastly because it was so neglected for so many years and they realized that if they wanted to stay in the game, they better catch up and then some.

Unfortunately I'm not overly familiar with Cubase, my understanding is that it runs better on PC's that it does on Macs and that might be a huge reason why I haven't really followed up on it. I have one fellow composer friend of mine who uses Cubase out of about a couple of dozens that I know personally here in LA (the rest is pretty much an even spread between Logic and DP). This one friend of mine keeps threatening to switch to Logic which (if he does) will bring the number of people whom I personally know who use Cubase down to zero.

I'm glad it's working for you, I really am...but your work methods and needs might not necessarily match mine, and hence what you find to be absolutely essential in Cubase, I might find to be useless...and vice versa.


----------



## midphase (Jul 28, 2009)

PS.

Regarding Logic 10...I don't think it comes down to lack of development from Berlin as much as basic economics. If Logic 9 continues to make money for Apple, then Apple will continue to support Logic and it'll be around for a long time. If Logic doesn't make money, then Apple will probably try to unload it to some other developer (although despite many rumors for at least the past 3 years, this still has to happen). 

My main issue with the way Apple runs the Logic team is the overt secrecy and lack of interaction with the end users. They seem to be very isolated as opposed to companies like NI who are much more open and welcoming to user input. I miss the days when Emagic was more like a small boutique and had maintenance updates on a monthly basis. However I don't miss the a-la-carte price and the not so friendly GUI. Since Apple has taken over, Logic Pro has become the (no doubt) biggest bang for the buck DAW in history and the ease of use has improved considerably. As a matter of fact, I was talking to a friend of mine today who needed to change something in the Environment, and all of a sudden I remembered about the Environment!!! I swear I had completely forgotten that the Environment still existed.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

Got ya Kays, it is of course the personal workflow and person in front of the computer bringing the music to life ... maybe it is a bit of frustration when I "switched" to Logic and could see lots of little things are simply not possible easily.

Why do I have to do such a big workaround to simply copy an audio snippet which is not an alias? In Cubase you got those little knobs on audio tracks where you can easily cut an audio snippet and quickly change the volume. Basically every sequencer got this?

If I have a little syllable in a choir which simply sticks out a bit, why do I have to automate the whole track or send a volume info to that spot or use that audio energizer, rather than just cut that little slice and pull down the little knob on the snippet. As far as I know you are able to do that in every other sequencer too.

Why is the mixer and arranger window so unflexible. In Cubase I can just order the tracks (no matter which ones) as I want and it automatically changes in the mixer window too. In Logic, you can not even move a track up or down, you can not even select multiple tracks by simply holding the shift key as every little app on the world allows it.

Not to start speaking of folders. I know that there are folders in Logic and that you can hide tracks, but it is not just the same as real folders. Look at the Cubase folder structure. It is just awesome to have order in a complete orchestra setup. I can close my strings folders when working on brass or ww.

Maybe I was just dissapointed that the ultimate standard sequencer is not able to handle the most easiest things


I know that Steinberg tends to put in more features and get rid of old bugs, but at least all those little things work intuitive.

Also I know that C5 currently doesn't have the best performance, especially graphicswise, but this can be just a matter of patch  ...


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

tmhuud @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Alex- I think you need to rethink WHY your getting the upgrade.  If its just to be "compatible to other studios and guys" then I feel (IMHO) that's the wrong reason. The ONLY software I have EVER needed in the 25 years I've been composing for tv and film is Pro Tools. THAT I felt (and correctly so) was something I needed to stay compatible not so much with other guys as so to speak but for other studios. When I walked into a studio (time and time again) I'd get, "So what do you use for music?" I'd answer , "Umm...Logic. Why?" "well we use Pro Tools here," they'd answer which was usual since in a final mix your dealing mainly with Engineers interested in processing audio and not so much musicians banging out tracks.
> 
> If its going to effect your creativity then buy all means go for 9 or whatever works.
> 
> Having and staying with Logic 7 has never lost me a gig or stopped me from doing what I do.



Yeh right, but that's the mixing/audio part. I ment composing wise, that I have to have Logic armed in order to get with these guys workflow and creating tracks.
If I have to work in another studio where the guys just have Logic for the sequencer stuff, it is better to sit down and simply start working rather than trying tocinvince the guy to install Cubase :D


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 28, 2009)

11 Good video reviews:

http://www.macprovideo.com/tutorial/logicfirstlook


----------



## Hannesdm (Jul 28, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> 11 Good video reviews:
> 
> http://www.macprovideo.com/tutorial/logicfirstlook



Nice Videos! But what an over-the-top-enthusiastic annoying voice! :?


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> 11 Good video reviews:
> 
> http://www.macprovideo.com/tutorial/logicfirstlook



Thanks Ned, gives a good insight on whats going on. Interesting and much more informative than on the Apple website ... especially bounce in place is cool ...
however I wonder why there is still no multibatch export. Imho this is a must especially for us guys who need to deliver audio stems or e.g. let mix in ProTools.

It's also kind dissapointing that you are not able to simply flex an audio file, but have to select a mode first. It should be selectable in the pref menu which mode you like and simply let you flex anything you like.


Sorry, but I couldn't resist:
"Look at this awesome little icon on the desktop ... and it saaaays Logic 9? Isn't that cool??? ... and the best thing, which blows my mind is, if you click on it ... and you really have to imagine what is going on here ..... it boots ... yes, you heard right, ... it boooots up ... Looooogic ... wooooow, this is one of the most brilliant things I've ever seen :D


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 28, 2009)

Ha! You boring, been-there-conquered-that Europeans! Quick, look - over there: It's a bouncing, spinning beach ball!


:wink:


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Ha! You boring, been-there-conquered-that Europeans! Quick, look - over there: It's a bouncing, spinning beach ball!
> 
> 
> :wink:



*lool*


----------



## Hannesdm (Jul 28, 2009)

:lol:


----------



## mikebarry (Jul 28, 2009)

Cubase...sounds awesome.....

Any according to Alex' post - Logic is slacking behind in system performance. Which for me is the biggest reason to get one over the other.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

Now since we are at it .. I really have one question I didn't find an answer too (and if it's not available, hopefully it is in Logic 9.

I just describe as I would do it in Cubase, since it might be most easiest way:

- When I use Symphobia, but I have to render hi and lo strings separated, I mostly "draw a line" at C2, to bring up the lowest Viola note into the "hi stem" and leave everything below to the "lo stem" ... 

- So I chose the MIDI notes of the hi stem and mute it with alt+M, then I can render the lo notes to an audio stem ....

- If I now want to render the high stem I simply select all notes and hit alt+M again, so I am just inverting the selection.

How can I do that in Logic? I don't want to select all notes again, mute the unmuted and the other way round??


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Jul 28, 2009)

In Logic, I use the select-all-above or below a given note. I can then mute them or solo them before the bounce. Very easy.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> In Logic, I use the select-all-above or below a given note. I can then mute them or solo them before the bounce. Very easy.



Cool thx!! Will try that!


----------



## SvK (Jul 28, 2009)

Regarding:

quote: "There will be no Logic 10"
http://pcmacsmackdown.com/cto-of-avid-to-now-work-for-apple/ (http://pcmacsmackdown.com/cto-of-avid-t ... for-apple/)



The Chief Technology Officer for Digidedlsign, David Lebolt (for the last 14 years) has left Avid to work for Apple....also PT market share has dropped 35 % over the last 5 years ......

If Logic is going anywhere, it's everywhere...

SvK


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2009)

There is no "THE ultimatesuperduperdefaultstandardultraineverystudio sequencer ."

There are several fine, really powerful ones. Each of them has advantages over the others and deficiencies compared to the others.

There also is no "THE ultimatesuperduperdefaultstandardultraineverystudio user." The same conditions apply.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2009)

midphase @ Mon Jul 27 said:


> "They feel that they have more control over the individual parameters if it remains as a single instance. But there are work-a-rounds"
> 
> The problem is that those workarounds end up costing you RAM also...so at the end of it, you're back to square one.
> 
> ...



I think Eric's suggestions are valid for Omnisphere as it is SO CPU intensive, but not valid for K 3.5.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> There is no "THE ultimatesuperduperdefaultstandardultraineverystudio sequencer ."
> 
> There are several fine, really powerful ones. Each of them has advantages over the others and deficiencies compared to the others.
> 
> There also is no "THE ultimatesuperduperdefaultstandardultraineverystudio user." The same conditions apply.



Hey Jay,
as you know I was just overdoing a bit. It is just funny or weird, I talk to people and tell them that I use Cubase, ... then they laugh ... then they show me some supercool features and how brilliant Logic is ... and then I laugh.

I mean it is kinda standard in every studio, but even the freeze and rendering function is not working correctly. I mean this is bread and butter stuff. It's like a car which has a economy gear system and everytime you use it, it looses fuel.


----------



## John DeBorde (Jul 28, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> I think Eric's suggestions are valid for Omnisphere as it is SO CPU intensive, but not valid for K 3.5.



O'sphere is pretty RAM intensive too. I love to start piling them on but it's the only thing I can think of having run into a RAM limit on in recent memory - that's not orchestral sample based that is. I'd love to see some improvements there.

I'm with Kays in that I'd just prefer to use everything monotimbrally, as it just makes my life easier. I'm still honing my technique with Omnisphere to find the right balance between what to layer multitimbrally and what to split into separate instances.

Of course, all this is driven by the fact that it's just so gosh darn bitchin. =o


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2009)

gsilbers @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> well, one thing i like better in other daws is the ability to edit different midi channels in the same piano roll or same window.. efficiently. in logic 8 you have to select several tracks and all the notes from both midi regions will show up and wont vary in color (oly in velocoty) and ypu can only edit one line of midi controller at a time. i think cubase and DP have this set in a more efficient way. even pro tools 8 has it better.
> apart from some of the deep midi tools like transform, splitter etc, pro tools 8 midi is at par with logic.
> ill check LP9 and see if there is a better way to edit multiple lanes of midi in a less confusing way .



Make friends with a linked combo of the Event List and Piano Roll. In the Event List choose a note and then under Edit > Select Equal Channel and all those events will be highlighted in the Piano Roll.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 28, 2009)

Also, there's a preference whether you want to color individual tracks or note velocities (in a piano roll editor: View->Region Colors). And look at the Hyper editor if you want to edit multiple controllers.

Alex, Pro Tools doesn't have a "volume control" for individual snippets either - it has a volume graph, same as Logic, and it works very well. This is one thing Logic does fine.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Also, there's a preference whether you want to color individual tracks or note velocities. And look at the Hyper editor if you want to edit multiple controllers.
> 
> Alex, Pro Tools doesn't have a "volume control" for individual snippets either - it has a volume graph, same as Logic, and it works very well. This is one thing Logic does fine.



Ah ok, thanks for clarification. Might be a personal thing but I like programs which offer several ways for workflows ... so that it is possible to alter volume this or either that or another way. If I am just limited to one or two things it is a bit like buying a lib which has only plain single patches, .. no way to use ModWheel or Keyswitches ...

Another question is, if you generally mean monotimbral ... does it mean you use one stereo output but several programs loaded? ... or one articulation per instance?
I think it is the first option, no? Can't imagine loading 10 K3.5 instances for only e.g. Trombones?


----------



## midphase (Jul 28, 2009)

Alex,

I think your main gripes with Logic appear to be solved with Logic 9. It seems like they listened to guys like you!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 28, 2009)

Alex, there is a Volume parameter for every region, calibrated in dB. It's in the Inspector (a word borrowed from Cubase, of course ).

As to your question about monotimbral instances, you have to balance efficiency and practicality. The point is that it's not efficient to put all your woodwinds in one instance, but you could easily use ten K3 instances for trombones if you don't want to use keyswitches or some other method of changing articulations on the fly.


----------



## amplayer (Jul 28, 2009)

With all the improvements Apple made to the program, I just don't understand why they didn't add a REAL track folders capability like you get in DP and Cubase.
Not having track folders makes orchestral mock-ups way unnecessarily painful in Logic.


----------



## mikebarry (Jul 28, 2009)

Guys may I recommend NOT installing the update - my rig has gone to all hell - having massive corruption. 

(on hold with apple support)

/\~O


----------



## Stevie (Jul 28, 2009)

Waywyn @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> as you know I was just overdoing a bit. It is just funny or weird, I talk to people and tell them that I use Cubase, ... then they laugh ... then they show me some supercool features and how brilliant Logic is ... and then I laugh.



full ack, brotha. happened many times to me.


----------



## SvK (Jul 28, 2009)

Update is great.....BUT:

BounceInPlace does NOT allow you to include fx coming from sends LAME!!

Also if you select multiple regions to "BounceInPlace" you get one file instead of multiple regions as audio files...BUMMER

say you are doing SFX work and you want to bust out 20 gunshots as seperate "BounceInPlace" files......

OR you want to bust out 20 kick drums with all the send info etc as seperate files...no can do....

SvK


----------



## germancomponist (Jul 28, 2009)

A friend of mine, a Logic and Cubase user, told me that Cubase sounds a little better... . Is it the audio engine or is he wrong?


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

germancomponist @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> A friend of mine, a Logic and Cubase user, told me that Cubase sounds a little better... . Is it the audio engine or is he wrong?



If so, everyone would use Cubase so their music sounds a little better?
Sorry, but this simply can't be true. My tracks sound as good as I mix and master them, not which sequencer I used to create them.


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 28, 2009)

midphase @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Alex,
> 
> I think your main gripes with Logic appear to be solved with Logic 9. It seems like they listened to guys like you!



Kewl, I am really looking forward!

Btw: It's not that I like to bash on Logic. I just always try to look behing all the hype etc. ... I do the same with Cubase of course too!


----------



## dinerdog (Jul 28, 2009)

I agree, overall it's a great update (L8 was unusable to me - too many crashes even on my MacPro) BUT:

The bounce in place is only offline - this sucks because if you occasionally use an external instrument (your beloved Virus perhaps) you still have to do a realtime bounce of the audio and bring back in. The same suckiness if your bouncing audio to a movie and happen to be using an external module. Why couldn't these 2 functions have the same online/offline selection that you get when bouncing down your Main Out?

On the Plus side, you can finally draw fades on Apple loops. Nice. Video responds better too.

Though, does anyone else have to click on a song TWICE, every time to open it? Clicking on a project the first time ONLY opens the app, then second time loads the song. That can't be right.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 28, 2009)

Waywyn @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> germancomponist @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> 
> 
> > A friend of mine, a Logic and Cubase user, told me that Cubase sounds a little better... . Is it the audio engine or is he wrong?
> ...


Sure, but there are very definite differences in the sonics of the various audio engines in all the major DAWs. Some are better than others in various aspects (playing back an audio file, mix buss, bouncing, etc, etc)

Done lots of shootouts here for many years and there are indeed substantial, repeatable differences in the DAWs in how they sound playing back identical audio files. Each has its own sonic characteristics. It's a complex subject and the simple "bit for bit" phase reversal tests that are often used is inadequate to measure the differences.

There are considerable differences in how all these software programs handle audio playback. If you don't believe me, try this in a high-end professional monitoring environment:

Take a great sounding stereo audio file, like a hi-fi mix with great dynamics, superb imaging, drums, low-end, etc.

• Play the file on the Mac Desktop

• Play the same file in the Quicktime Player application

• Play the same file in iTunes 

• Play the same file in Logic

• Play the same file in Pro Tools

• Play the same file in Digital Performer

• Play the same file in Cubase/Nuendo

etc, etc.

Check it out and draw your own conclusions....You'll see what I mean. 

I think what your referring to though is that you you can get excellent results from all of them, which is most definitely true.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 28, 2009)

midphase @ Mon Jul 27 said:


> "They feel that they have more control over the individual parameters if it remains as a single instance. But there are work-a-rounds"
> 
> The problem is that those workarounds end up costing you RAM also...so at the end of it, you're back to square one.


Actually, that's not really true. Using multiple instances of non-apple plug-ins uses more RAM than any workarounds would.



> I actually tend to disagree with Eric, the RAM cost of running separate instances is quite minimal in the grand scheme of things.


To you, in your experience for the way YOU work. 

I can assure you that folks working with large templates of third-party plugs within the host cannot work the way you are suggesting.



> The bottom line is that I have yet to have any issues from having too many instances of a particular plugin.


Sure....probably because you are primary using a lot of EXS24s and apple plugs...no?

The EXS24 and other Logic plug-ins are not AU plug-ins, so they don't take ANY extra RAM overhead. In fact, they are not really plug-ins at all....they just look that way, but they are integrated into the Logic code....so there's a lot more resource sharing than with third-party plugs.



> (Actually, the only issue that I'm having with a plugin happens to be with Spectrasonic's Trilogy wrapper).


Of course, but that's not for any of the reasons we are talking about. It's not a native plug-in, uses Rosetta, etc so the problems with the wrapper workaround are unique. The comparison should be made with native UB AU plug-ins.



> I'm not saying that Eric doesn't know what he's talking about, what I'm saying is that the RAM cost might not be as extensive as his post suggests.
> 
> If someone can show in an objective test that running multi-timbral instances (along with all of the necessary workarounds to obtain the same degree of control over each instrument) saves RAM and/or CPU resources, then I'll shut up about it. But until now nobody has stepped up to the plate, and the tests that I have run myself have resulted in the differences being negligible at best!


This is very simple to prove. Look at your virtual memory and start opening a bunch of RMX plug-ins....watch what happens to your RAM. 



> I have been using Logic in this manner for almost 8 years, from a 1ghz G4 to my current Mac Pro. It has never stopped me from being able to deliver the scores that I have worked on, or realize the vision of the music that I had in my head.


Sure...same here, but I've been using it since it was Creator in 1987 and Gerhard was the demonstrator. 

More complex plug-ins like RMX and Omnisphere (and Kontakt) use more RAM as overhead per instance than Logic's own plugs.

By using a lot of native Logic plugs, you have been able to work really well since the RAM overhead is minimal. It's a different story though if you rely more on third-party plugs as your primary sounds.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 28, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> I think Eric's suggestions are valid for Omnisphere as it is SO CPU intensive, but not valid for K 3.5.


Jay, I think you are confusing RAM and CPU usage.

Every third party plug-in instance uses more RAM overhead.....not necessarily the case with native Logic plugs like EXS24.

You are probably not running into the issue as much on your rig since you rely a lot on EXS24 instances....no?


----------



## Stevie (Jul 28, 2009)

Eric, I just love your comprehensive posts


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2009)

spectrum @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> 
> 
> > I think Eric's suggestions are valid for Omnisphere as it is SO CPU intensive, but not valid for K 3.5.
> ...



No, Eric, I am not, but with K 3.5, everything has changed because it can now address RAM outside of Logic, as the EXS24 does, so multi-timbral usage of Kontakt simply does not make a lot of sense in Logic. I can run a large number of K3.5 instances well in Logic. Kays is correct.

This is also true of Play, which is why East West recommends separate instances to spread throughout the cores.

That said, for folks who dislike key switching and want mega-templates, they really still need to offload some of the stuff in Plogue Bidule, or Vienna Ensemble Pro when it is released on the same computer or farm machines.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 28, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> spectrum @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> ...


Sort of...

...but if I read you guys' posts correctly, neither you or Kays uses really large templates in your work like some other composers do. (I actually work more like you guys do BTW)

The issue with really large templates within the host is that even with Kontakt 3.5, each instance uses more RAM overhead, even though the sounds are loaded in RAM outside the host, which alleviates some of the problem.



> This is also true of Play, which is why East West recommends separate instances to spread throughout the cores.


But this is not regarding RAM usage.

"spreading throughout the cores" applies to CPU usage only. Multi-core usage applies primarily to CPU performance, so this same approach applies to any plug-ins....including Spectrasonics plug-ins.



> That said, for folks who dislike key switching and want mega-templates, they really still need to offload some of the stuff in Plogue Bidule, or Vienna Ensemble Pro when it is released on the same computer....


Right....and just to clarify - this relates purely to RAM usage.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2009)

Eric,I think we are having 2 different conversations here. I am talking about how the best overall workflow for software instruments is achieved with Logic Pro.

IMHO, workflow with software instruments is about balancing 2 issues: RAM and CPU usage. Running low on either with large numbers gets you into trouble.

It used to be that folks opened multi-timbral versions of Kontakt and Play because each instance sucked up too much CPU so you never really even got to the point where RAM was an issue because you ran out of CPU power first.

With the advent of multi-core machines and the ability of K 3.5, EXS24, and Play to access RAM outside of Logic, CPU usage becomes less of an issue compared to RAM in Logic IF it is spread throughout the cores. If not, then CPU still becomes a factor, even on these machines.

Also, there is the automation issue where if you try to cc individual MIDI channels, the AU goes cuckoo for cocoa puffs so you have to create auxes and automate those, which is a bit if a PITA.

So, since you and I agree that "for folks who dislike key switching and want mega-templates, they really still need to offload some of the stuff in Plogue Bidule, or Vienna Ensemble Pro when it is released on the same computer" due to RAM usage, then clearly the better workflow in Logic is to do as East West recommends, N.I. recommends, and Kays and I endorse, is to use separate instances.

Omnisphere however, may or may not be different since it uses not only far more RAM but far more CPU than the others, correct? Obviously, I will defer to you for that recommendation.

Eric, am I missing something in my overall evaluation?

All I can say, is if Jay Asher says one thing and Eric Persing another, I would follow Eric, since he has forgotten more about this stuff than I will ever know.


----------



## muziksculp (Jul 28, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Also, there is the automation issue where if you try to cc individual MIDI channels, the AU goes cuckoo for cocoa puffs so you have to create auxes and automate those, which is a bit if a PITA.



Will this PITA detail ever be fixed in LP ? 

I was hoping this will be fixed one of these days, this has been around too long for comfort, and with tons of requests from users to improve this detail, yet, I'm guessing LP9 hasn't fixed it. (Or has it finally been fixed ?)

Since this is most likely part of the odd LP's midi architecture, when it comes to using Multi-Timbr. Objects in the environment, and the way they respond to CC data. Which could possibly be fixed if they updated the environment to better handle this scenario. 

By the way, I also don't think they have done anything to improve the environment in LP9. Have they ?


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2009)

I think, and no one at Apple has said this to me, Apple views multi-timbral as a hold over from the tone module days and simply not that necessary, so I doubt this is a priority for them.

I wasn't aware that the Environment needed improving. It seems like a lot of users want to get rid of it, which I think would be a disaster, so Apple has compromised by making it less necessary to go there unless like you and me, we want to.


----------



## muziksculp (Jul 28, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Apple views multi-timbral as a hold over from the tone module days and simply not that necessary, so I doubt this is a priority for them.



I simply don't buy Apple's multi-timbral point of view. Multi-Timbral Synths came after Mono-timbral synths/sound-modules. Multi-Timbral sound modules, or VI's make it easier to consolidate an entire collection of instruments into a workspace, easier for layers, and editing multiple sounds assigned to various parts/midi channels, and then independently route them to multiple outputs as needed (that's why Kontakt 3 is 64 part-multi-timbr NOT mono-timbral ! It just makes a lot of sense to me. What does NOT make sense to me, is the archaic method of using mono-timbral style VI's (Back to the 70's) that Apple is so happy to convince us is a better way to work.

This needs to be fixed in LP, but I'm not very optimistic it will ever be fixed. Cubase 5 on the otherhand is a great example of how nicely Multi-Timbral VI's (VST's) are handled.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 28, 2009)

muziksculp @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Apple views multi-timbral as a hold over from the tone module days and simply not that necessary, so I doubt this is a priority for them.
> ...



Mind you, Apple did not say that, it is what I am assuming based on the way the development has progressed.

But I am sorry, while I respect your right to disagree, I still see it as a dated concept.overall.


----------



## dinerdog (Jul 28, 2009)

I think archaic is a good way to describe a lot of Logic. I know they don't think anyone uses midi modules anymore, but since Logic's inception there was a limit on bank changes, where Performer and DP had all you needed. 

For example if you have a fully loaded JV5080 (I know it's really old school) you need 2 separate objects to access all the sounds. I stopped using a lot of my old stuff cause it was such a PITA on Logic.

That's just one tiny example. I think it translates into the entire program though. I've submitted tons of requests/crash reports etc. and seen very little of it implemented. I still like and use Logic (since 1.6), but I'm just sayin'...2 steps forward, 1 step back...


----------



## muziksculp (Jul 28, 2009)

Why then does Native Instruments, EastWest, Spectrasonics, and many other sound developers, design their VI's in a Multi-Timbral format ? Are they all doing it wrong, while Apple is the only one doing it right ? 

I seriously doubt it. Logic Pro is the only DAW which seems to have this odd architecture, when it comes to dealing with multi-timbral VI's.

Besides this detail, which is not really a show stopper, but can be a major PITA, LP is a great DAW.

I just ordered my LP9 upgrade form LP8. LP9's new audio editing features are wonderful. I still think LP is a fantastic DAW, but some things still need to be improved. As long as Apple/Logic hears us, and does something about what we are requesting, things will get better. 

With 64-bit DAWs (hopefully LP9 will also be updated to 64-bit in OSX-SL), and faster, and more processors, providing us with more memory access, and multi-processing to run complex VI's, providing tons of polyphony. 

Improving the Multi-Timbral VI implementation/handling of CC, in LP9 still makes a lot of sense to me.


----------



## drasticmeasures (Jul 28, 2009)

midphase @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> I actually tend to disagree with Eric, the RAM cost of running separate instances is quite minimal in the grand scheme of things.
> 
> I'm not saying that Eric doesn't know what he's talking about, what I'm saying is that the RAM cost might not be as extensive as his post suggests.
> 
> I have been using Logic in this manner for almost 8 years, from a 1ghz G4 to my current Mac Pro.



LOL....you've got chutzpah kid. It takes a pretty big set of stones to tell the mousetrap maker how to catch mice....and that phallic closer....classic. 
Did you think Persing started using logic once it was available in the Apple store?


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 28, 2009)

Eric P, I have a phallic question about mice if you're still here: have you found that Omnisphere works better in 64-bit Cubase?

If so I have to eat crow, because what I described having seen so far is that programs that distribute the load across multiple processors are fine in 32-bit splendor, and ones that don't run out of CPU.

Obviously that's a problem in Logic for instruments like yours that really do want to be multitimbral (or multi-part).


----------



## Waywyn (Jul 29, 2009)

spectrum @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Waywyn @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> 
> 
> > germancomponist @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> ...



Thanks for that interesting post. I definitely have to do such a test, but in the end you already said it - it may just sound different but this "different" may appear better to someone who e.g. likes a smoother wav signal or a more pristine glass sounding one. I can't describe it better, I once heard that difference when changing from my Soundblaster back then to the MOTU 2408 ... Okay that was hardware, but you get the idea


----------



## tmhuud (Jul 29, 2009)

Nathan Furst @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> midphase @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> 
> 
> > I actually tend to disagree with Eric, the RAM cost of running separate instances is quite minimal in the grand scheme of things.
> ...



Thats it - 8 years eh? Hmm - ever hear of C-Lab?

http://tamw.atari-users.net/notator.htm

(wow-did that screenshot bring back memories!)


----------



## midphase (Jul 30, 2009)

I run K3.5 mostly...not a whole lot of EXS24


----------



## midphase (Jul 30, 2009)

"and that phallic closer....classic. "


? 

Nothing phallic in my post...unless that's how you roll.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 31, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Eric,I think we are having 2 different conversations here. I am talking about how the best overall workflow for software instruments is achieved with Logic Pro.
> 
> IMHO, workflow with software instruments is about balancing 2 issues: RAM and CPU usage. Running low on either with large numbers gets you into trouble.
> 
> It used to be that folks opened multi-timbral versions of Kontakt and Play because each instance sucked up too much CPU so you never really even got to the point where RAM was an issue because you ran out of CPU power first.


Yes....we're on the same page. 



> With the advent of multi-core machines and the ability of K 3.5, EXS24, and Play to access RAM outside of Logic, CPU usage becomes less of an issue compared to RAM in Logic IF it is spread throughout the cores. If not, then CPU still becomes a factor, even on these machines.


Yep.



> Also, there is the automation issue where if you try to cc individual MIDI channels, the AU goes cuckoo for cocoa puffs so you have to create auxes and automate those, which is a bit if a PITA.


Not sure what you mean there....Pretty sure that's not an issue with instruments like Omnisphere. 



> So, since you and I agree that "for folks who dislike key switching and want mega-templates, they really still need to offload some of the stuff in Plogue Bidule, or Vienna Ensemble Pro when it is released on the same computer" due to RAM usage, then clearly the better workflow in Logic is to do as East West recommends, N.I. recommends, and Kays and I endorse, is to use separate instances.


I don't agree that this is the approach to take for everything. When you have a multi-timbral instrument, it's more efficient to use it multitimbrally for a lot of reasons. So a combination of approach is best, instead of one way or the other exclusively.



> Omnisphere however, may or may not be different since it uses not only far more RAM but far more CPU than the others, correct? Obviously, I will defer to you for that recommendation.
> 
> Eric, am I missing something in my overall evaluation?


It's not just Omnisphere....that's try of other multitimbral plugs too, (RMX, Kontakt, Play, etc)



> All I can say, is if Jay Asher says one thing and Eric Persing another, I would follow Eric, since he has forgotten more about this stuff than I will ever know.


 Ha!  8)


----------



## spectrum (Jul 31, 2009)

muziksculp @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Ashermusic @ Tue Jul 28 said:
> 
> 
> > Apple views multi-timbral as a hold over from the tone module days and simply not that necessary, so I doubt this is a priority for them.
> ...


I agree with you! 

However, I am happy that Apple made multi-timbral usage much easier in LP8....it's no longer necessary to even deal with the Environment at all to use MT VIs....which was a major improvement.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 31, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Eric P, I have a phallic question about mice if you're still here: have you found that Omnisphere works better in 64-bit Cubase?


Yes....it's working really well there. 



> If so I have to eat crow, because what I described having seen so far is that programs that distribute the load across multiple processors are fine in 32-bit splendor, and ones that don't run out of CPU.


"fine" is relative of course. 

Plug-ins themselves cannot distribute CPU load to multi-processors (unfortunately), so using multiple instances does indeed make sense to distribute the performance to different cores - since the hosts handle that job.

So splitting up your 8 Omnisphere parts using 2 instances of 4 parts each is a good idea to do. 

In a 32 bit rig, that's a smarter and more efficient approach than opening 8 Omnispheres for sure!

For RAM usage, 64 bit is the way to go....because all these headroom issues of opening lots of plug-ins and more powerful plug-ins stop being an issue. The bottleneck gets a whole lot wider....so it's not really a bottleneck anymore in a fully 64 bit world. 



> Obviously that's a problem in Logic for instruments like yours that really do want to be multitimbral (or multi-part).


It's just a good idea with multitimbral instruments to combine the approaches, so that you get the benefits of cpu distribution AND the efficiencies of doing a lot with each MT plug-in instance.....otherwise it gets wasteful and you hit the bottleneck faster in a 32 bit system like Logic.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 31, 2009)

Waywyn @ Tue Jul 28 said:


> Thanks for that interesting post. I definitely have to do such a test, but in the end you already said it - it may just sound different but this "different" may appear better to someone who e.g. likes a smoother wav signal or a more pristine glass sounding one. I can't describe it better, I once heard that difference when changing from my Soundblaster back then to the MOTU 2408 ... Okay that was hardware, but you get the idea


Ideally, you want the file to sound as close to your original version as possible.

In my experience, the best reference in that test is the Quicktime Player (or the Apple Desktop itself, which is also Quicktime based) btw.....it has the least artifacts and is the truest to the correct original sound of the playback. So you can use that as a Reference standard to judge all the sound of the DAWS.

You'll be very surprised at all the differences. There are indeed ones that are much better at playing back the file without coloration than others.


----------



## castaliamusic (Jul 31, 2009)

[/quote]
Ideally, you want the file to sound as close to your original version as possible.

In my experience, the best reference in that test is the Quicktime Player (or the Apple Desktop itself, which is also Quicktime based) btw.....it has the least artifacts and is the truest to the correct original sound of the playback. So you can use that as a Reference standard to judge all the sound of the DAWS.

You'll be very surprised at all the differences. There are indeed ones that are much better at playing back the file without coloration than others. [/quote]

The only valid approach is Double Blind Test. You'll be surprised by the results...


----------



## drasticmeasures (Jul 31, 2009)

midphase @ Thu Jul 30 said:


> Nothing phallic in my post...unless that's how you roll.



Hey, don't knock it till you try it.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 31, 2009)

Jay: Also, there is the automation issue where if you try to cc individual MIDI channels, the AU goes cuckoo for cocoa puffs so you have to create auxes and automate those, which is a bit if a PITA.[/quote]

Eric: Not sure what you mean there....Pretty sure that's not an issue with instruments like Omnisphere. 

Jay: I should have said automate. If in Logic you open a stereo multi-timbral instance of RMX with 4 parts and you drag them into the Arrange window and then try to automate each MIDI channels volume, RMX goes bananas. So you have to use a multi-ouput version and automate the auxes. The same is true for Kontakt.

So, since you and I agree that "for folks who dislike key switching and want mega-templates, they really still need to offload some of the stuff in Plogue Bidule, or Vienna Ensemble Pro when it is released on the same computer" due to RAM usage, then clearly the better workflow in Logic is to do as East West recommends, N.I. recommends, and Kays and I endorse, is to use separate instances.[/quote]

Eric: I don't agree that this is the approach to take for everything. When you have a multi-timbral instrument, it's more efficient to use it multitimbrally for a lot of reasons. So a combination of approach is best, instead of one way or the other exclusively.

Jay: So how then do YOU decide what to use as a multi-timbral instance and which separately?


----------



## spectrum (Jul 31, 2009)

castaliamusic @ Fri Jul 31 said:


> The only valid approach is Double Blind Test. You'll be surprised by the results...


Oh yeah....we do that kind of testing here all the time....usually every week in fact.

The results of our testing are always the same conclusions....even when we use impartial new listeners BTW. 

I do want to point out that these sonic difference do NOT appear so clearly unless you are in a world-class monitoring facility, that is really dialed and setup well.

The differences in the sonic characteristics do multiply though in a multi-track environment...so it's a good idea to always do this type of testing to see what your software is doing to your audio, just by running your audio through it.


----------



## spectrum (Jul 31, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Fri Jul 31 said:


> Jay: I should have said automate. If in Logic you open a stereo multi-timbral instance of RMX with 4 parts and you drag them into the Arrange window and then try to automate each MIDI channels volume, RMX goes bananas.


Have you tried this with the new Automation system in RMX version 1.8?



> Jay: So how then do YOU decide what to use as a multi-timbral instance and which separately?



Use it multitimbrally until the CPU starts getting a bit too high and then open another instance and repeat.


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 31, 2009)

spectrum @ Fri Jul 31 said:


> Ashermusic @ Fri Jul 31 said:
> 
> 
> > Jay: I should have said automate. If in Logic you open a stereo multi-timbral instance of RMX with 4 parts and you drag them into the Arrange window and then try to automate each MIDI channels volume, RMX goes bananas.
> ...



You mean an internal automation system within the plug? II have not tried it but I want to be consistent with all my third party stuff as much as possible so even if that alleviates the issue, what do YOU do with Kontakt automation? I assume you use it.

Your multi-timbral workflow sure flies in the face of Doug/Nick's recommendations. Sort of like having to choose between Moses and Buddha.


----------



## dinerdog (Jul 31, 2009)

Esqueleto: "I don't believe in God, I believe in science."


----------



## midphase (Jul 31, 2009)

"However, I am happy that Apple made multi-timbral usage much easier in LP8."

Easier yes...functional...that's debatable. As has been mentioned above, automation is still an issue unfortunately.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Jul 31, 2009)

Thanks Mr. Eric.

And I have to agree with Kays. I'm a big fan of Logic, but the ability to select multiple output AND input MIDI channels for a track would solve a lot of problems.

Dealing with multiple outputs into the mixer is a complicated issue and I'm not sure how they could deal with it differently, but there definitely are times when you want more than one program in a plug-in.


----------



## careyford (Jul 31, 2009)

Eric and Jay and company. Thanks for taking the time to have this debate publicly. It's really fascinating. Now will somebody please tell me the best way to setup my Logic template. :mrgreen: 

Richard


----------



## Ashermusic (Jul 31, 2009)

careyford @ Fri Jul 31 said:


> Eric and Jay and company. Thanks for taking the time to have this debate publicly. It's really fascinating. Now will somebody please tell me the best way to setup my Logic template. :mrgreen:
> 
> Richard



Please understand I am not debating Eric. I am in no way his peer.

I stated my understanding of it and Eric is giving us his. The smart money is on Eric.

I have had a hellacious week as my wife has been having severe back problems, but next week I hope to do some more tests.


----------



## garylionelli (Jul 31, 2009)

I was with DP for eons, and always had multitimbral instances of everything going on. But now I've been with Logic for 2 years, and I love the one-instance-per-channel approach Logic seems best at. It's so easy to add effects and routings at the sequence level, nothing else makes for a faster workflow, IMO. In fact, I look for VIs that conform to this approach: Kontakt 3.5, VSL, Play, and of course EXS24. (Sometimes I'll choose not to even instantiate a VI that doesn't work this way.) 

The big one missing for me here is everything by Spectrasonics. I would love it if sometime in the future there could be a satellite/mothership design with RMX & Omnisphere where you could instantiate many individual RMXs, one per channel in Logic, but they would all be addressing a single RMX engine. Eric -- is this something you'd ever consider? Thanks!


----------



## midphase (Jul 31, 2009)

"I have had a hellacious week as my wife has been having severe back problems,"

Oh yeah? Well my wife's been having headaches and chest pains! Take that Asher!


----------



## Ashermusic (Aug 1, 2009)

midphase @ Fri Jul 31 said:


> "I have had a hellacious week as my wife has been having severe back problems,"
> 
> Oh yeah? Well my wife's been having headaches and chest pains! Take that Asher!



I am serious.I have been taking her to the doctor, helping her to and from the bathroom to the chair to the bed, getting her pills, etc. I love her deeply and I am not complaining but it is making getting any work done hard to accomplish.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 1, 2009)

Nobody who's ever injured his or her back is laughing. Fortunately the two times I did it (once + a re-injury) were just muscle strains that got better after three days, but it hurts like hell every time you move. No fun.


----------



## david robinson (Aug 1, 2009)

jay,
sorry to hear of ypur wife's health problems.
the best to you both. 
as far as logic is concerned, i'd like to see it taken to a hospital and amputated from Apple, before it dies a nasty unnatural death. (from over-bloating).
David R.


----------



## Ashermusic (Aug 2, 2009)

david robinson @ Sat Aug 01 said:


> jay,
> sorry to hear of ypur wife's health problems.
> the best to you both.
> as far as logic is concerned, i'd like to see it taken to a hospital and amputated from Apple, before it dies a nasty unnatural death. (from over-bloating).
> David R.



Thanks, David.

So far, with the little time I have had to test it due to all this, I am very pleased with LP9, especially the long wished for ability to import various aspects of channel strips and bounce and replace, both top of my wish list.


----------



## gsilbers (Aug 2, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sun Aug 02 said:


> david robinson @ Sat Aug 01 said:
> 
> 
> > jay,
> ...



mine too! 

well.. i was wishing for audiosuite (sountrack has it. wtf) and import session data
but this is still great. 

ive been using it on my laptop and i could hardly notice its 9. 
good thing is that you can use 8 in a computer and 9 in another and wont 
have a problem with the copy protection. the only reason keeping me for not using another logic as a slave/sampler. now i can have exs24 (virtualization) k3.5 and vienna ensemble =o


----------



## stevenson-again (Aug 3, 2009)

> Eric and Jay and company. Thanks for taking the time to have this debate publicly. It's really fascinating. Now will somebody please tell me the best way to setup my Logic template.



if your dinkum in looking for an idea for a solution, i use single channel midi instruments cabled to the kontakt instance.

if you cable them to a transofrmer first, you can convert cc7 to an unused cc number and then assign that number to your volume sliders in the kontakt instance. you can then use the volume sliders in arrange for automation without affecting the kontakt SI CSO volume levels. works perfectly.

i then think of the kontakt instance as a bus, and i may or may not have it visible in arrange. this is why the environment in logic is fantastic and powerful. i current am doing something similar to switch between divisi types for LASS, i can assign the programming to any outing i want to combine any combination of LASS divisis. sorry - sidetracking.

i was just finding that too many instances of kontakt was causing headaches RAM wise - but that was probably because i had fiddled around with the settings in a bad way. i still like the multi-timbral approach because it does offer some easy flexibility and i like thinking in terms of using them as a bus.


----------



## amplayer (Aug 3, 2009)

I hate to beat a dead horse but WRT the multi-timbral vs. mono-timbral in Logic:

Until/unless Intel comes up with a massively parallel CPU (i.e., 64 or more cores like nvidia), multi-timbral just makes more sense for really large sampler projects in Logic. Besides the fact that the Logic track folders are brain-dead compared to other DAW implementations, it is just way more convenient to have only a few instances of the sampler application instead of 70 or 80 that are needed for complex tasks like orchestral mock-ups.
BTW, does anyone besides me wonder why Apple went to the trouble of making EXS24 use its own address space when you can only use a single instrument per instance? With the possible exception of a Piano, how is it helpful to access all that RAM with only a single instrument?


----------



## Ashermusic (Aug 3, 2009)

amplayer @ Mon Aug 03 said:


> I hate to beat a dead horse but WRT the multi-timbral vs. mono-timbral in Logic:
> 
> Until/unless Intel comes up with a massively parallel CPU (i.e., 64 or more cores like nvidia), multi-timbral just makes more sense for really large sampler projects in Logic. Besides the fact that the Logic track folders are brain-dead compared to other DAW implementations, it is just way more convenient to have only a few instances of the sampler application instead of 70 or 80 that are needed for complex tasks like orchestral mock-ups.
> BTW, does anyone besides me wonder why Apple went to the trouble of making EXS24 use its own address space when you can only use a single instrument per instance? With the possible exception of a Piano, how is it helpful to access all that RAM with only a single instrument?



Andrew, I have seen this before and it bewilders me. Please explain why it is more convenient to have a bunch of Arrange window MIDI tracks to deal with rather than a bunch of single instance tracks, i.e one multi-timbral that requires 16 MIDI channels to automate and edit versus 16 single instances? I just don't get it.

The EXS24 accesses the total RAM, not per instance. It seems like I can load up a ton of EXS24s without an issue, except that a certain point Activity Monitor does not accurately tell you what is going on. The problem seems to come when in addition to those, I start to load up Kontakt or Omnisphere. Then the Virtual Memory issue kicks in and Logic quits. 

I am talking to folks at Apple to try to get to the bottom of it.


----------



## careyford (Aug 3, 2009)

Jay,

Best wishes to your wife. I didn't mean 'debate' pejoratively. Perhaps conversation would be more accurate. I value Eric and you for your contributions to this forum and to making music. 

Thanks, 
Richard


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 3, 2009)

Earlier in this thread someone mentioned how well Cubase handles multitimbral instances. While this is true from a utilitarian sense, my early testing of Play instances and EWQLSO indicates that single instances are WAY more CPU efficient than multitimbral instances.

I haven't started adding RMX's and Omnispheres, but when I do, I'm with Jay Asher- I figure Eric knows from whence he speaks, and will try a hybrid approach- each instance will be lightly multitimbral.

Personally, having used things multitimbrally in Cubase for many years, I think it's easier, takes up less screen real estate and makes for a more efficient workflow. However, I want to use my Mac Pro Octocore as efficiently as possible. That seems to equal using monotimbral instances of Kontakt/Play etc, and lightly multimbral instances of CPU/RAM intensive plugs like Omni and Stylus. Hey, it's a start.

Jay- I hope your wife feels much better soon.


----------



## david robinson (Aug 3, 2009)

Ashermusic @ Sun Aug 02 said:


> david robinson @ Sat Aug 01 said:
> 
> 
> > jay,
> ...



Hi,
please don't misunderstand my position in regards to Logic.
i've used this app around 14 hrs a day for the last 10 years.
obviously i must like it.
as it's been "upgraded" i've found myself using these new features very little.
i suppose i've a standard way of working, with doesn't require, beat mapping, elastic audio, and the like.
i try to get it right in the first place.
what i would like to see is touch screen technology and a number of new ways to input data.
Especially something that would transcend MIDI input, and a way to paint the notes
into the Score and Piano Roll editors. I'm talking pitch contours here, which could then be edited for accuracy in the usual ways.
Also a way of breaking up cyclic rhythms to add variations more easily.
To me, my head is still much faster at thinking up content than Logic is realizing it.
thanks for reading.
David R.


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 3, 2009)

It would have been a nice bonus if Apple/Logic changed the way multi-timbral VI's utilize multi-processors (i.e. on an 8 core Mac Pro), I'm not sure if there is a technical reason that's holding them back from implementing this.

Basically, allowing LP9 to distribute the CPU load more evenly on all available processors, when using a single, heavily loaded instance of a multi-timbral VI such as KONTAKT 3, or RMX, ...etc. 

Maybe in a future LP9 update ? or could OSX-SL finally offer this improvement ? :roll:


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 3, 2009)

"it is just way more convenient to have only a few instances of the sampler application instead of 70 or 80 that are needed for complex tasks like orchestral mock-ups"

It depends on how you work. For me something in between is best.


----------



## stevenson-again (Aug 3, 2009)

> It would have been a nice bonus if Apple/Logic changed the way multi-timbral VI's utilize multi-processors (i.e. on an 8 core Mac Pro), I'm not sure if there is a technical reason that's holding them back from implementing this.
> 
> Basically, allowing LP9 to distribute the CPU load more evenly on all available processors, when using a single, heavily loaded instance of a multi-timbral VI such as KONTAKT 3, or RMX, ...etc.



there is a reason for this and it has been published on their technical discussions site. the reason is that each CSO (channel strip object) represents one single thread, which means it has to be processed on one core.

it's recommended to output to a bus or an aux if you find that one CSO is overloading, by removing the plug-ins on it and moving them to the aux, thereby preserving the signal chain but spreading the load to a different thread.

using single instances of kontakt will spread the cpu load around, but for the most part, and depending on what you are using it for cpu load on a multi-timbral kontakt instance is within limits, and is preferable to the RAM hit you can potentially get from having too many 3rd party instances open in logic. it's a balancing act and a matter of taste; if you are more comfortable with a mutli-timbral setup you have to bear in mind that it will use correspondingly more cpu, but if you prefer single instances you need to be aware that it can start to push logic toward the edge. either way, if you don't have any trouble there is nothing to worry about but if you do, you can consider the other approach.


----------



## muziksculp (Aug 3, 2009)

Thanks for the explanation. 

Yes, it sure is a balancing act. between multi-processor, and RAM utilization, sooner, or later, one of them will put a cap on performance, depending on which occurs first.

I'm currently looking into going with a sample library farm PC/Mac system, I would rather not worry too much about dealing with this balancing act too much, but rather get creative composing, without having to constantly deal with CPU/RAM meters going into the red, and have the luxury of a large template ready to trigger the instrument sounds I need for a given project, all ready, loaded, and just waiting to be triggered. 

OSX-Snow Leopard, and Windows 7 will surely help improve overall performance on both Mac and PC platforms. 

I'm waiting for the upcoming VE-Pro from VSL, before venturing into a farm system, VE-Pro should make networking/integrating farm machines to a master DAW, making it easier, more flexible, and less costly to put a very capable Mac, and PC farm system together. Hopefully, this will work as solid as having audio interfaces, if this finally materializes, and is true, Then, IMHO we would have taken a big step forward, and in the right direction !


----------



## MaraschinoMusic (Aug 3, 2009)

Nick Batzdorf @ Sat Aug 01 said:


> Thanks Mr. Eric.
> 
> And I have to agree with Kays. I'm a big fan of Logic, but the ability to select multiple output AND input MIDI channels for a track would solve a lot of problems.



Not sure about the latest version, but in Logic 5.5.1 you can set each track's MIDI output channel to [ALL]. There is no setting for a track's MIDI input channel, the track will record channel information along with all the other MIDI data and it is the output channel that decides where this data is sent. Record data from your master keyboard transmitting on channel 1 (for example), and then overdub onto the same track with your keyboard transmitting on channel 2 (or whatever...), repeat as many times as necessary - set the track's output channel to ALL, and you're cooking!


----------



## midphase (Aug 3, 2009)

David,

Yeah...you need to upgrade to L9....things have gotten a lot easier since then.

The biggest gripe is that cc7 and cc10 automation is still a tad flaky when using multi timbral objects, and you lose the high resolution of Logic's internal automation which is considerably better and easier to automate. Further, if you need to send different eq or reverb sends to different instruments contained in the multi instance, you're SOL without doing some audio routing acrobatics. Perhaps someone can correct me, but I have yet to figure out an efficient way of doing this without doubling my track count.


----------



## MaraschinoMusic (Aug 3, 2009)

midphase @ Tue Aug 04 said:


> David,
> 
> Yeah...you need to upgrade to L9....things have gotten a lot easier since then.



Says you... :D


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 3, 2009)

Just so you know, David, I've been using Logic for something like 15 years.  I was aware of how to set the MIDI channels.


----------



## tmhuud (Aug 3, 2009)

lol.... that made my miserable day better. I owe u one.


----------



## midphase (Aug 4, 2009)

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but you're describing automating from Logic to the K3's built in reverb as opposed to being able to have multiple outputs from Kontakt that behave, for all intents and purposes, as individual instances even though they belong to the same multi-timbral instance. As far as I know, this is not really feasible. 

No matter, for my way of working, using K3 as a multi-timbral instance is a solution looking for a problem rather then the other way around. But I realize my methodology differs from others so I guess I should just consider myself lucky!


----------



## spectrum (Aug 4, 2009)

midphase @ Mon Aug 03 said:


> The biggest gripe is that cc7 and cc10 automation is still a tad flaky when using multi timbral objects, and you lose the high resolution of Logic's internal automation which is considerably better and easier to automate.


The latest changes in Omnisphere and RMX's automation system should solve this issue for you. You can very easily automate anything in the plug-in on any channel using Logic's automation system.

Give it a try.


----------



## Ashermusic (Aug 4, 2009)

spectrum @ Tue Aug 04 said:


> midphase @ Mon Aug 03 said:
> 
> 
> > The biggest gripe is that cc7 and cc10 automation is still a tad flaky when using multi timbral objects, and you lose the high resolution of Logic's internal automation which is considerably better and easier to automate.
> ...



Eric, it is great that you are working around Logic's flaws this way.
So now I have to revise my advice to "use single instances of Kontakt, Play, and of course, the EXS24 but multi-timbral versins of Omnisphere and Stylus RMX."

How does that sound?


----------



## NYC Composer (Aug 4, 2009)

sounds like what i said a number of posts ago :wink: 

( and I still hope your wife is feeling better)


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Aug 4, 2009)

"using K3 as a multi-timbral instance is a solution looking for a problem rather then the other way around"

Usually, but for example how would you handle LASS? Not counting the ensemble patches, it has four versions of each articulation (solo + three different groups for each instrument) that you mix and match. It makes sense to put all four in a K3 instance and mix them to stereo internally, but then what happens when you play divisi and want to address them individually? Having them on separate channels in an Omni track doesn't solve that problem. And using separate tracks for each of four variations of each articulation of each instrument is a little much, I think. 

A related problem: Audio Impressions isn't finished yet, but dealing with its automatic divisi system is also convoluted in Logic. DVZ separates the notes it receives into separate MIDI channels and then sends them back to Logic. But Logic doesn't let you set the MIDI channels a track listens to very easily. You can do it, but it's nuisance.

I'm not sure what the best system would be - it's easy to complain! - but I do think this is one aspect of Logic that could stand a redesign.


----------



## midphase (Aug 4, 2009)

I dunno....my head is spinning. All I know is that what I've been doing has been working very well for me for a number of years. I don't have LASS so I'll have to cross that bridge when I get to it.

BTW....anyone in LA going to the RSPE Logic 9 event tonight? Would be cool to hang out:

http://www.rspe.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.browse&category_id=43&Itemid=134&vmcchk=1&Itemid=134 (http://www.rspe.com/index.php?option=co ... Itemid=134)


----------



## Ashermusic (Aug 4, 2009)

midphase @ Tue Aug 04 said:


> I dunno....my head is spinning. All I know is that what I've been doing has been working very well for me for a number of years. I don't have LASS so I'll have to cross that bridge when I get to it.
> 
> BTW....anyone in LA going to the RSPE Logic 9 event tonight? Would be cool to hang out:
> 
> http://www.rspe.com/index.php?option=com_virtuemart&page=shop.browse&category_id=43&Itemid=134&vmcchk=1&Itemid=134 (http://www.rspe.com/index.php?option=co ... Itemid=134)



I think I am, Kays.


----------



## dcoscina (Aug 27, 2009)

Przemek K. @ Sat Jul 25 said:


> So many choices so little time...Logic, Cubase, Sonar, which one has more or the better features,
> which one is more stable on which OS and on Mac or PC?
> 
> Who cares?
> ...



that was about the gayest ad I have ever seen.....


----------



## dcoscina (Aug 27, 2009)

uh huh


----------



## bryla (Aug 28, 2009)

Thought this would be interesting:

Is Logic a 64 bit application?
Logic is a hybrid 64/32 bit application - and has been since version 6/7!!!!!!! 
Some internal processing of algorithms/data occurs at 64 bit resolution (i.e. it's a 64 bit calculation). 

The 64 bit has NOTHING to do with audio quality. The audio engine of Logic remains 32 bit float, but it can calculate at 64 bit IF...and ONLY IF...an effect/instrument plug-in performs such calculations (some of the internal Logic plug-ins do). You should note that in some (or most) instances, it's of NO advantage to calculate at 64 bit....and would, in fact, actually slow down some operations/calculations.

When Snow Leopard becomes available, we will undoubtedly see improvements such as access to more memory for Logic itself (see the next section on the EXS24). As mentioned above, not all processes/internal mathematics will actually benefit from 64 bit precision, so some aspects of Logic will probably still execute 32 bit code as it is MORE efficient than equivalent 64 bit calculation

- Dave Bellingham


----------



## dcoscina (Aug 28, 2009)

I am about to upgrade to Logic 9 simply because, of DP6, Cubase 5, and Logic 8, my workflow is the fastest on Logic. However, I have sought refuge in the other programs because of the lack of stability. Mind you, DP crashes once in a while as does Cubase so nothing is perfect. I tend to do my film scoring chores using Logic even though I know DP is superior to it in many ways. But, for my poor myopia, Logic is the nicest blend between GUI and functionality. 

One question: Vienna Ensemble is basically a multi-timbral VI host. In programs such as Cubase and DP where the VI is not embedded and can be affected by 16 MIDI tracks (CC7), how is loading separate instatiations of VE3/Pro sensible in Logic 9? I can see in the case of Kontakt 3 because all of the samples use RAM outside the DAW no matter how many instances are opened. They seem to pool in an area that accesses system memory.

Just curious.


----------

