Bitwig 5.2 BETA available

[Bjørnson]

Sum it up: Bitwig best meets my needs as a DAW in a pros/cons evaluation, but nevertheless it sucks at some core DAW aspects.

I also see it this way, and I only really want to upgrade when there comes a bigger core upgrade again.
Nevertheless, I spend more of my time here on KVR checking for updates about VSTs and Bitwig than actually making music. It's addicting and easier

[spoontechnique]

Why all this debate? If a DAW uses too much CPU for you, you should find out with the demo. I leared CPU management on an older laptop and apply those lesssons on my modern desktop.

There is no objective way to plan development. It's always a decision. You agree with the devs or you move on. Personally I value CLAP, Linux support, DAWProject, the Grid, and devices.

I love grid-based devices. More Grid modules and customization! I wish all FX+ could convert to grid.

Accusing people of being fanboys is silly. I am a fanboy of Bitwig, Waveform, Renoise, Blockhead, etc. Small teams of people worked hard to create and maintain software that I enjoy. Nobody made me buy this stuff!

[Scotty]

Users are entitled to their gripes. The barrage of denials from those who are seemingly unconditionally satisfied only adds to any frustration someone might feel with the program. It is a little bit odd and more than apparent that some treat Bitwig like the little sister who is getting bullied. The program is generally very good; innovative in many ways and in a state of ongoing development. The adults in the room should be able to tolerate some wishful thinking, an expression of frustration or some dissent from time to time without big brother with two years of jiujitsu training showing up to take on all comers. Is Bitwig a damsel in distress?

[strangeraeons]

Oversampling is an audio process no ?
How is it applied to midi ?
Midi messages are midi messages, and there is no "sampling" in a midi message and thus no "over"-sampling.
Or am I missing something ?

From my understanding, all Grids (Poly/FX/Note) are the same thing just packaged in a different containers. For example, the FX Grid has a Mix knob. They all have the same default CPU hit when empty, which is not entirely insignificant and can add up. So you actually can't use Note Grids like crazy to do simple MIDI processing across a session nilly willy without taking the CPU hit into consideration.

I'll give a real world example; I was using an FX selector that contained about two dozen Note Grids in the slots of the selector to handle articulation mapping. All the Note Grids were doing was generating a single solitary note that was added to whatever MIDI was playing back from clips (a keyswitch note.) This meant I ended up having up to 100 Note Grids in a session. Whilst only one Note Grid would be active at a time, and all it was doing was generating a single solitary MIDI note, this ended up using mad amounts of CPU. What I ended up having to do was optimize it by using only a single Note Grid to generate a single note, then using regular MIDI transpose FX in the FX selector slots to transpose that single generated note coming from the Note Grid. The result was literally 95% less CPU usage.

So the Note Grid is definitely a scenario where it actually really makes sense to offer a different version, because it does indeed have a ton of unnecessary CPU overhead for a device that is meant to only be used for the lightest of CPU tasks (MIDI data manipulation.) I don't think we will see it soon tho, because I think it's more of an overhaul/completely different environment from it's current iteration, which is just a Grid labeled "Note Grid" simply put into a different device rack container.

If I recall, I think I've read somewhere that audio rate modulation starts to fall apart without oversampling or something along those lines. So the Grids being 4x oversampled by default might not just a question of audio quality/oscillator quality, it might be the logistics of the modulation quality offered in Bitwig as well. I'm not an authority on this stuff, just throwing it into the discussion. Perhaps somebody who knows more can chime in and verify or dismiss that.

Cheers

Modern synths all oversample oscillators precisely because of audio rate and non linear processes. Serum and vital give you the option to toggle oversampling. You can try doing fm (actually pm in most synths), rm or am with out it, I've found that it tends to sound very ugly.

I believe this is because oversampling increases the resolution of the calculations in the dsp. Lower sample rates means there will be more values interpolated to the closest "round" value, thus resulting in a sound that is less harmonic or "analog". The only synth I've heard where the fm actually sounds good with no oversampling applied is the virus. There was probably some extremely clever math done to make it so.

IMO the grid has the best sounding fm (linear, through zero and exponential, as well as phase modulation) in the digital domain. Oversampling is most likely critical in its execution.

It is also pretty obvious that users patching in the grid would have at least one module that would greatly benefit from oversampling, so again it's a no brainer to have it there by default; just like it is the case for pigments, phase plant, Dune 3 etc. Serum, Vital and a few others offer the option to choose. I choose to have them on at least 4x by default anyway

[Bjørnson]

Users are entitled to their gripes. The barrage of denials from those who are seemingly unconditionally satisfied only adds to any frustration someone might feel with the program. It is a little bit odd and more than apparent that some treat Bitwig like the little sister who is getting bullied. The program is generally very good; innovative in many ways and in a state of ongoing development. The adults in the room should be able to tolerate some wishful thinking, an expression of frustration or some dissent from time to time without big brother with two years of jiujitsu training showing up to take on all comers. Is Bitwig a damsel in distress?

Thanks for this input! I can look at online forums now a little bit different
In the end, emotional debates can also help to refine your own opinion on the topic. That's a good thing next to the more informal / constructive comments...

[Milkman]

I dont think anybody sees Bitwig as a "damsel in distress" but what we do see is years of larger DAW(and other) brand management that involves attempting to demean and discredit newer, more modern DAWs and their newer philosophies.

After the frustration I've been through with Cubase, I will absolutely spend a few moments of my time defending Bitwig from unqualified nonsense. If the day comes that Bitwig loses my confidence and/or 'enshittifies' itself, I'll have no trouble with rational criticism.

[lunardigs]

hey kvr!
how's kvr doing?
oh bitwig, cool.
... yeah

[Jac459]

Oversampling is an audio process no ?
How is it applied to midi ?
Midi messages are midi messages, and there is no "sampling" in a midi message and thus no "over"-sampling.
Or am I missing something ?

From my understanding, all Grids (Poly/FX/Note) are the same thing just packaged in a different containers. For example, the FX Grid has a Mix knob. They all have the same default CPU hit when empty, which is not entirely insignificant and can add up. So you actually can't use Note Grids like crazy to do simple MIDI processing across a session nilly willy without taking the CPU hit into consideration.

I'll give a real world example; I was using an FX selector that contained about two dozen Note Grids in the slots of the selector to handle articulation mapping. All the Note Grids were doing was generating a single solitary note that was added to whatever MIDI was playing back from clips (a keyswitch note.) This meant I ended up having up to 100 Note Grids in a session. Whilst only one Note Grid would be active at a time, and all it was doing was generating a single solitary MIDI note, this ended up using mad amounts of CPU. What I ended up having to do was optimize it by using only a single Note Grid to generate a single note, then using regular MIDI transpose FX in the FX selector slots to transpose that single generated note coming from the Note Grid. The result was literally 95% less CPU usage.

So the Note Grid is definitely a scenario where it actually really makes sense to offer a different version, because it does indeed have a ton of unnecessary CPU overhead for a device that is meant to only be used for the lightest of CPU tasks (MIDI data manipulation.) I don't think we will see it soon tho, because I think it's more of an overhaul/completely different environment from it's current iteration, which is just a Grid labeled "Note Grid" simply put into a different device rack container.

If I recall, I think I've read somewhere that audio rate modulation starts to fall apart without oversampling or something along those lines. So the Grids being 4x oversampled by default might not just a question of audio quality/oscillator quality, it might be the logistics of the modulation quality offered in Bitwig as well. I'm not an authority on this stuff, just throwing it into the discussion. Perhaps somebody who knows more can chime in and verify or dismiss that.

Cheers

You are right to mention the audio rate modulations....
In Dune 3 for example you can set the CPU usage for audio rate modulation.

I never developed audio software so I can't comment much neither....

That being said, on the general question of CPU usage, I have next to 0 issue. I am using a ton of plugins on a ton of tracks, my CPU goes up but the sound is never affected. So I really wonder if the CPU usage measurement can really be trusted.

[Jac459]

Users are entitled to their gripes. The barrage of denials from those who are seemingly unconditionally satisfied only adds to any frustration someone might feel with the program. It is a little bit odd and more than apparent that some treat Bitwig like the little sister who is getting bullied. The program is generally very good; innovative in many ways and in a state of ongoing development. The adults in the room should be able to tolerate some wishful thinking, an expression of frustration or some dissent from time to time without big brother with two years of jiujitsu training showing up to take on all comers. Is Bitwig a damsel in distress?

I think most of the case, it is not about defending Bitwig but keeping the discussion clear and organised.
Like when 5.2 appeared, 3 threads where openned, the 3 of them flooded by people complaining about their little features missing. Can't we have 1 "missing features" and 1 "test of the new version"?

Look at this current discussion, it has been raised by somebody having issue with CURRENT devices CPU usage. Why the f**k not creating a specific thread for that ? Why polluting a thread dedicated on 5.2 beta testing?

I appreciate that not everybody has a smooth sailing with 100% of their software, but you shouldn't take a discussion hostage when you have a specific issue imho.

[Greenstorm33]

Users are entitled to their gripes. The barrage of denials from those who are seemingly unconditionally satisfied only adds to any frustration someone might feel with the program. It is a little bit odd and more than apparent that some treat Bitwig like the little sister who is getting bullied. The program is generally very good; innovative in many ways and in a state of ongoing development. The adults in the room should be able to tolerate some wishful thinking, an expression of frustration or some dissent from time to time without big brother with two years of jiujitsu training showing up to take on all comers. Is Bitwig a damsel in distress?

It's the "they're going to lose all their users because of <x pet feature request/issue> and/or I'm entitled to <y specific resolution of said issue> as a paying user" people that weird me out a bit. Most of the requests are reasonable since there is a lot about Bitwig that could be improved, but there are a lot of people using the DAW who have different priorities than you and your make or break feature is almost certainly not everyone else's make or break feature, nor are you entitled to have your requests resolved to your satisfaction as one paying user among many.

Also if you've been here any time at all you've probably noticed that the devs mostly do what they want. Presumably it's not hurting them too much or they'd have changed tact by now. It's just part of the joys of using the DAW, and trying to change that by complaining about it on kvr is a recipe for disappointment.

[Scotty]

Thanks for taking my comments in the spirit that they were intended. I love the program. There is real vision behind its creation. It is gradually becoming more fully formed and I am growing with it.

Users are entitled to their gripes. The barrage of denials from those who are seemingly unconditionally satisfied only adds to any frustration someone might feel with the program. It is a little bit odd and more than apparent that some treat Bitwig like the little sister who is getting bullied. The program is generally very good; innovative in many ways and in a state of ongoing development. The adults in the room should be able to tolerate some wishful thinking, an expression of frustration or some dissent from time to time without big brother with two years of jiujitsu training showing up to take on all comers. Is Bitwig a damsel in distress?

Thanks for this input! I can look at online forums now a little bit different
In the end, emotional debates can also help to refine your own opinion on the topic. That's a good thing next to the more informal / constructive comments...

[spoontechnique]

That's what puzzles me, the hyperbolic language. There's no melodrama about damsels and little sisters. This thread is for discussing a beta. There is useful criticism and there are overreactions. And let's remember there are real people who make Bitwig.

If you're consistently frustrated by a DAW, I'd switch. Software features shouldn't kill the fun of making music. This is a low stakes issue.

When it comes to this feature or that, we don't have all the info. We don't know the skillsets and roles of the Bitwig team. We don't know the roadmap or the quirks of the code. We don't see the sales reports of when people upgrade. So while feature requests are useful, they are just that: requests.

Consider MSEGs, a long standing request. They were released as part of a whole unified system along with an oscillator, LFO, and waveshaper. Waiting until the system is finished is a decision you can disagree with, but either way you ultimately are trusting or not trusting the devs.

[carlca]

I find your solution absolutely ridiculous as always. Seems like your over protection of this daw is taken over your common sense.

So you tell a person to don’t use plugins the ones he paid for and use something else? If person want to use any feature of the included plugin but forced not to because of by default oversampling always on is minor issue?

Don’t forget bitwig is a company which survive by being paid by customers. You make it seems like this daw don’t own you anything. Let me open a secret for you. It f**king does because we, customers pay for it. Not donate. Pay.

I knew there was a reason that you were on my ignore list! Now scuttle off back to my bozo bin, there's a good little fellow

[pdxindy]

I think most of the case, it is not about defending Bitwig but keeping the discussion clear and organised.
Like when 5.2 appeared, 3 threads where openned, the 3 of them flooded by people complaining about their little features missing. Can't we have 1 "missing features" and 1 "test of the new version"?

It would be great if there were 2 threads... one for discussing what is, and one for discussing what isn't. I would be happy to stay in the first discussing using the software and the second would be for all the complaints, what-ifs, etc.

That way, the people who want to complain, have a place for it, without it constantly disrupting the place for discussing using the software.

[pdxindy]

That's what puzzles me, the hyperbolic language. There's no melodrama about damsels and little sisters. This thread is for discussing a beta. There is useful criticism and there are overreactions. And let's remember there are real people who make Bitwig.

If you're consistently frustrated by a DAW, I'd switch. Software features shouldn't kill the fun of making music. This is a low stakes issue.

Also, when it comes to complaining, one is only talking to other users here and not even speaking to the people who can do something about it. Even useful criticism is not all that useful when it's not directed at the people who can do something about it.