+1
Also, it would be nice to be able to set up shaper configurations not just in serial, but also in parallel stack.
+1
Probably because most people think there's no point, specially if they have read the responses to this and similar requests (like NoiseShaper's factory samples) over the years.Jakob / Cableguys wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2023 6:28 pmThank you for the feature wish. It's something we consider, but the wish comes up very rarely (sometimes on forums, but rarely via email).
To allow for the addition of new features and Shapers to ShaperBox via future updates, we need to 'reserve' many parameters, as the VST/AU formats do not allow the reordering of existing parameters without breaking a plugin’s compatibility with existing projects, etc.
Hi Lee, Is the plugin latency reduced by that too?Lee / Cableguys wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2023 12:22 pm
We just released ShaperBox 3.3.1 – this one brings quality improvements and fixes.
First, CPU usage has been reduced when using the General and Complex Audio Trigger algorithms.
Just a thought/suggestion, but with other large multi-fx or modular plugins, some deal with avoiding thousands of automation targets by having free form automation assignments. Example: the plugin will have something like 100 automation params, then users can go into an edit panel to assign which plugin params they want assigned to each of the 100 available automation params. Usually folks aren't concurrently automating more than a handful of parameters.Jakob / Cableguys wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 6:43 pmTo allow for the addition of new features and Shapers to ShaperBox via future updates, we need to 'reserve' many parameters, as the VST/AU formats do not allow the reordering of existing parameters without breaking a plugin’s compatibility with existing projects, etc.
This has already resulted in almost 3000 plugin parameters for ShaperBox 3, and allowing just two of each Shaper to be loaded would double that to 6000, which could start to cause noticeable issues for parameter handling in some DAWs.
I'm sure you can figure something out. There are plenty of modular plugins out there which don't suffer from this issue. You can probably learn from them how it can be done.Jakob / Cableguys wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 6:43 pmTo allow for the addition of new features and Shapers to ShaperBox via future updates, we need to 'reserve' many parameters, as the VST/AU formats do not allow the reordering of existing parameters without breaking a plugin’s compatibility with existing projects, etc.
This has already resulted in almost 3000 plugin parameters for ShaperBox 3, and allowing just two of each Shaper to be loaded would double that to 6000, which could start to cause noticeable issues for parameter handling in some DAWs.
If I understand correctly, what you're proposing is to have a fixed, much smaller amount (as you say 100) of automation parameters exposed by ShaperBox plugin to the host, while each of the exposed automation parameters can then be assigned to a user-chosen internal plugin control/knob etc.? Something along the lines of a macro functionality in certain synths?Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 8:07 pm Just a thought/suggestion, but with other large multi-fx or modular plugins, some deal with avoiding thousands of automation targets by having free form automation assignments. Example: the plugin will have something like 100 automation params, then users can go into an edit panel to assign which plugin params they want assigned to each of the 100 available automation params. Usually folks aren't concurrently automating more than a handful of parameters.
Neither approach, either yours or plugins that require users to make the assignments, is without drawbacks. But if automation is the only thing stopping you, may be something you want to consider for SB4.
Exactly. It's just a different way of allowing for automation on complex plugins that either have variable number of parameters (such as modular synths or rack effects where components may come in or out and nothing is fixed) or would that would otherwise require massive amounts of automation params.DanielKonopka wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 9:56 pmIf I understand correctly, what you're proposing is to have a fixed, much smaller amount (as you say 100) of automation parameters exposed by ShaperBox plugin to the host, while each of the exposed automation parameters can then be assigned to a user-chosen internal plugin control/knob etc.? Something along the lines of a macro functionality in certain synths?Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 8:07 pm Just a thought/suggestion, but with other large multi-fx or modular plugins, some deal with avoiding thousands of automation targets by having free form automation assignments. Example: the plugin will have something like 100 automation params, then users can go into an edit panel to assign which plugin params they want assigned to each of the 100 available automation params. Usually folks aren't concurrently automating more than a handful of parameters.
Neither approach, either yours or plugins that require users to make the assignments, is without drawbacks. But if automation is the only thing stopping you, may be something you want to consider for SB4.
Please do not do this.DanielKonopka wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 9:56 pmIf I understand correctly, what you're proposing is to have a fixed, much smaller amount (as you say 100) of automation parameters exposed by ShaperBox plugin to the host, while each of the exposed automation parameters can then be assigned to a user-chosen internal plugin control/knob etc.? Something along the lines of a macro functionality in certain synths?Funkybot's Evil Twin wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 8:07 pm Just a thought/suggestion, but with other large multi-fx or modular plugins, some deal with avoiding thousands of automation targets by having free form automation assignments. Example: the plugin will have something like 100 automation params, then users can go into an edit panel to assign which plugin params they want assigned to each of the 100 available automation params. Usually folks aren't concurrently automating more than a handful of parameters.
Neither approach, either yours or plugins that require users to make the assignments, is without drawbacks. But if automation is the only thing stopping you, may be something you want to consider for SB4.
For the record: it's not my favorite either. It's a pain in the ass with control surfaces and essentially renders them useless. It also makes automation a chore. I'm just saying, it's an option if the number of automation params is the sole factor in not allowing use of 2 shapers at once.
Hi! Plugin latency is the same – we need this latency for accurate transient positioning.midi_transmission wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 7:16 pmHi Lee, Is the plugin latency reduced by that too?Lee / Cableguys wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2023 12:22 pm
We just released ShaperBox 3.3.1 – this one brings quality improvements and fixes.
First, CPU usage has been reduced when using the General and Complex Audio Trigger algorithms.
I'd like to add that latency depends on your settings and can be between 0 samples and 16ms.Lee / Cableguys wrote: ↑Sun Jul 02, 2023 6:32 pmHi! Plugin latency is the same – we need this latency for accurate transient positioning.midi_transmission wrote: ↑Sat Jul 01, 2023 7:16 pmHi Lee, Is the plugin latency reduced by that too?Lee / Cableguys wrote: ↑Thu Jun 29, 2023 12:22 pm
We just released ShaperBox 3.3.1 – this one brings quality improvements and fixes.
First, CPU usage has been reduced when using the General and Complex Audio Trigger algorithms.
© KVR Audio, Inc. 2000-2024
Submit: News, Plugins, Hosts & Apps | Advertise @ KVR | Developer Account | About KVR / Contact Us | Privacy Statement