I also like the split screen editor for racks and the new default rack route creation and semantics!
Thanks
Dave
Brad, I don’t know how you did all of this in a matter of a few days. You’ve taken support to a new level! I just did a quick check of the new features and all seem to be working great. Thanks so much for implementing these.
Yeah, Brad works at an insane pace, and provides the most responsive support (and implementation of feature suggestions) of any software I’ve ever seen.
@brad, don’t burn yourself out!!!
Neil
1 Like
Fantastic stuff, Brad. I was reading through the blog post, saying “Yesss!!” to myself in every paragraph. Some really nice stuff in there, not just for new users. I particularly like the split song/rack view, and the split setlist/song parts view. I also welcome the hiding by default of some ports (loopback etc) - I wonder whether the inclusion of these hidden ports could be temporarily enabled by holding a modifier key when opening a port drop-down?
One suggestion - how about a keyboard shortcut to toggle between split/single view mode? It could be useful in situations where there’s a lot of stuff in the rack or song, to avoid the need for scrolling, for us keyboard junkies!
Neil
32 hours coding, 6 hours sleep… What could possibly go wrong? Bring on the weekend!
Keystroke to toggle zoom makes sense.
4 Likes
It works for some plugins , but not for others…For example , in omnisphere , the plugins parameters only show numbers , and except for the level of Multis , even with all parameters ticked in state behavior , the states doesnt’ toggle the changes made in the plugin across various states (I hope you understand)…
I know ,it’s not very fair to say, but I think Forte , as tomboughner said, handles better this “plugin automation” , with snaphot system…
And the preset system is not ideal for the moment…
Is there a way you implement a system a little like in Forte for these plugins automation ( it’s the only part of the software where Forte is better in my opinion ) ?
Thanks @HAIKINE_Alexandre,
I’m not really sure what Forte could be doing besides either capturing the entire plugin chunk data, or capturing all the parameters which is equivalent to Cantabile’s pseudo presets and/or state parameter capture. I guess it’s just the usability model that’s different.
I’ll keep all this in mind and will probably address it when I come to Morph/Randomize where parameter presets will become more important.
Brad
I understand , Brad , but why In Omnisphre or in many plugins , the plugins parameters show as numbers only , and even with all ticked , any change in the plugin is not stored and applied across the states ? (Maybe you could try yourself with Omnisphere ? )
Is there a way to make it work ?
I’m about 99% sure that Forte stores the entire plugin chunk data,which is what most audio software does (at least in my experience). With most software, anytime you save a project, the software grabs the full chunk data from each plugin and stores it as part of the project. That way, even if the plugin parameters are set to a custom configuration (not a preset), the plugin will still load with the correct parameters when the project is reloaded. I think this is why Cantabile’s way of handling plugin data is not intuitive for some - it is different from the way other audio programs do it.
1 Like
I believe you are correct. I had a conversation with Mike about the BLOB associated with each setting. Kontakt breaks that model regularly.
Hi Alexandre,
Have you seen this instruction page for Omnisphere, it may hold the answer to your problems.
more here :
https://support.spectrasonics.net/manual/Omnisphere/concepts/automation/page01.html
Hope this helps …
Dave
1 Like
Hallelujah Dave ! 
…And sorry ,Brad 
I had totally missed that point ! Now it works (of course) !!!
Thanks a lot Dave , really !
1 Like
No problem. To be clear, this is how Cantabile works:
- A copy of the plugin chunk (the VST name for a blob) is saved in the song in the state the plugin is in when the song is saved.
- For plugins with only a single preset (aka program), Cantabile simulates 128 presets by saving 128 copies of the chunk and loading the chunk back to the plugin when switching presets. This is handy but depending on the plugin can be slow.
- For plugins with the Entire Bank behaviour turned on, a copy of the chunk is saved with the state.
- For plugins with the Selected Program behaviour turned on, the number of the selected program is saved with the state.
- For states with a parameter behaviour enabled, copies of those parameters are saved with the state.
- When switching states:
- First, the plugin chunk is reloaded (if Entire Bank behaviour is turned on)
- Second, the selected preset is selected (if Selected Preset behaviour is turned on)
- Third, any parameters who’s behaviour is turned on is applied
3 Likes
Thanks for the explanation, Brad. That definitely helps me understand what is happening.
I have a suggestion that I think would make this simpler, at least for the user.
Assuming ‘Selected Preset’ behavior is checked:
- Save plugin chunk data in every song and every state
- Save a checksum for the plugin chunk, as well.
- When a song or state is recalled, load the plugin chunk, unless the checksum matches the checksum of the currently loaded data for that plugin. In that case, the plugin data is the same, so no need to reload.
To me, that would make C3 work similarly to how other audio programs work with VSTs.
Not to say that your idea may be beneficial, but I have noticed a few references in this particular thread asking to make C3 like other audio programs. I tried every available VST host I could get my hands on, and I settled on C3 because it WAS NOT like the others. I personally hoped that all the changes that have taken place in the last 3 months would not affect this wonderful program, and, from what I have experienced, it hasn’t. I do not want changes that are going to slow load times or conflict with plugins. I had enough of that frustration with “the others”. I absolutely loathed Forte, and many of the others, including Cantabile 2. I am though keeping an open mind to the many changes of recent, hoping those changes will not sacrifice the sanctity of C3. Just my 2 cents.
Corky,
I may be missing something but I don’t see how this approach would sacrifice any flexibility or benefits of C3. I agree that slower load times are bad, but what I am proposing will not cause that. The only way I am asking for C3 to be “like other audio programs” is in how it handles vst data. Right now, I find it unnecessarily complex.
Hi Tom,
As I said, this idea may be a beneficial one. I do not really know. The way C3 handles the data may be the charm of this program. It may be why Forte crashed many of my VSTs and C3 does not. As I also said, I keep an open mind to the many requests Brad receives. There is nothing wrong with the great ideas presented on this site and learn a lot here. I stopped programming many years ago and gladly leave it to those who do it so well in today’s world. My “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” approach comes from some developers who destroyed great progs in trying to improve perfection. All I am stating is that you may find it strange that C3 may not handle things like other progs, and I am thinking “yeah, thank goodness”. Unnecessarily complex?..maybe…does it affect the outcome? …don’t know, but not seen from my narrow view. All I really know is that I am satisfied with C3, far and above all the others I tried. If the data handling is affecting you negatively, then maybe it needs to be looked into. Wish you all the best in your transition from Forte and find it as enjoyable as I did.
Respectively
Corky
I understand, Corky, and agree with pretty much everything you said - especially the part about being satisifed with C3 above the others!
Tom
1 Like
The plugin has to report the names to the host. If it doesn’t, all you’ll see is numbers.