Bitwig 5.2 BETA available

[vroteg]

Probably behaves this way to ease getting everything back to a uniform size across all tracks after you increase or decrease the size of one track. Imagine the OCD that would be triggered in so many people if they could never get that ONE track to match the size of everything else after increasing it's size to edit something. Make sense? haha

Make zero fking sense…

[loungepanda]

The CPU/DSP usage of Compressor+ is indeed somewhat high. More than Presswerk or Material Comp with OS turned on, for instance.

But of course these comparisons are a bit unfair given that this is MB. Maybe a broadband mode should be available (if possible) for general purpose tasks where you need a lower footprint?

[vroteg]

The CPU/DSP usage of Compressor+ is indeed somewhat high. More than Presswerk or Material Comp with OS turned on, for instance.

But of course these comparisons are a bit unfair given that this is MB. Maybe a broadband mode should be available (if possible) for general purpose tasks where you need a lower footprint?

This is not mb compressor mate. It has some weird gimmicky multi band detection. But compressor itself is single band.

[C-quence]

After beta the performance probably will be better.

[loungepanda]

The CPU/DSP usage of Compressor+ is indeed somewhat high. More than Presswerk or Material Comp with OS turned on, for instance.

But of course these comparisons are a bit unfair given that this is MB. Maybe a broadband mode should be available (if possible) for general purpose tasks where you need a lower footprint?

This is not mb compressor mate. It has some weird gimmicky multi band detection. But compressor itself is single band.

Intensity Offset relatively adjusts the compression curve for this analysis band. Positive settings represent stronger compression, and negatives settings back off compression from this band. Changes to any band's Intensity Offset is shown on the device's central display as a diverging compression curve for that band.

Timing Offset relatively adjusts the timing parameters for this analysis band. Positive settings represent longer times, and negatives settings are shorter than the base settings. Timing changes are only visualized in the gain reduction (and in the audio).

[aproject]

In my case, on Macbook Pro m1 (Sonoma), only the first plugins consume the most CPU, later the CPU usage does not increase, I duplicated 32 tracks with Compressor+ and Over and the Macbook works without any major problems.

[vroteg]

MIntensity Offset relatively adjusts the compression curve for this analysis band. Positive settings represent stronger compression, and negatives settings back off compression from this band. Changes to any band's Intensity Offset is shown on the device's central display as a diverging compression curve for that band.

Timing Offset relatively adjusts the timing parameters for this analysis band. Positive settings represent longer times, and negatives settings are shorter than the base settings. Timing changes are only visualized in the gain reduction (and in the audio).

Compressor+ analyzes incoming audio across four frequency bands, which are shown on the device's colorful display and in the expanded view. Fold it out to access each band's Intensity and Timing offsets in order to fine-tune which parts of the signal cause compression. So if you want the bass to trigger less, just decrease its band's Intensity.

[loungepanda]

So it's quasi-MB. Most compressors don't let you set per-band timing and curves.

[Dionysos]

The multiband nature of Compressor+ isn't made super clear anywhere. My impression from the changelog is that it's just the analysis section that works on multiple bands while the compression itself is broadband. But then it also says this about the "Prism" VCA mode: "Prism gives a clean blend of true multiband compression, with unified single-band compression". I don't know what that means! Are they thinking "blend" in terms of "how it feels", or a literal blend/mix of differently processed audio?

[kurt008]

The goal was to offload CPU processing of the GUI to the GPU to lessen overall CPU use, not making the graphics more flashy

Ok boys and girls, if I now need a full featured combined graphics high performance CPU high performance... this and that.....

offload CPU processing of the GUI to the GPU to lessen overall CPU use

this was surely not the question. My AMD graphics card, which also isn't installed with a fully compatible graphics driver (because I highly suspect there's non available (and guess why? What do you know how many different GPU's are already running out there? And how many different CPU's...? May be there are several times more types of GPU's running than CPU's...?!?
So my guess is, that simply a lot of graphics hardware never will get a 100% proper compatible set of drivers - that simple it is.
For Microsoft the manufacturers get cash in some way, making them write drivers for MS Windows right from the hardware's start. But Linux...?

This is my guess but... I refuse - on the other hand - to follow up all the wet dreams of especially manufacturers of hard- and software, because such a machine has to be payable. And I'm not the Billionaire looking for a fancy hobby - sorry. If for a DAW there's a need of several specific components, which are even not known to many people, then such a DAW becomes unusable for me - because I can't and even if - I'd refuse to - afford timely and financially to waste my resources for building such a "power machine" from scratch or buy a specially built one (for most likely an also very special price...).

And as long as I even don't know, if there is any compatible hardware fulfilling such demands like asked for there will be no more machine in my household running Bitwig Studio - period.

I want to make music, but I refuse to accept the participation in a race for compatible hardware.
Once tracker software made music on a text based screen. Now even a usual graphics card has to be replaced by a gamer card for proper 3D-performance...

Folks, in a reasonable DAW 3D capability simply is at least highly questionable If one only wants to make use of the multi core GPU for maths this shouldn't make 3D-capability necessary - right?
3D on the other hand in my eyes is a poor trial to give a technical opportunity to make something look more colorful, more "attractive" to new customers - what basically meets Bitwigs policy since a very long time... and that is permanently new invents instead of enhancing existing stuff to a high professional level. Bitwigs reality since a very long time: After invention almost everything is simply abandoned - there are numerous examples, what speaks the exact same language, because new stuff can be presented, while enhancing old stuff looks "too little new" and is less effective for new customers.

And if indeed performance is an issue: Why not coding the time critical components in an "adult" programming language and on a machine level (like C or at least c++ and like practiced by other DAW makers) instead of this 'Basic for pseudo-professionals' called "Java" ?!?!? Even c++ - if properly coded - makes by far faster software. But instead... we users are asked to buy more and more ... what kind of hardware?

Again: Nobody can tell me if there is a fully compatible graphics card present at all - right? On the other hand Bitwig wanted to offer a native-Linux DAW... so what?!?!? I guess, Bitwig even was on the "first promise, later perhaps regret" path long ago!

I can and will not risk to make my work machine unusable again for this dream. I will abandon Bitwig Studio long before, which is by far not the only existing DAW and... one of only a few asking me to install a gamer graphics card (which btw. I first have to find). Because there's one thing I surely will never do: Installing a new MS product - never again!
I depend on a proper running and reliable PC, but I'm not addicted to Bitwig Studio!

I think almost every developer in the world would burst laughing when reading your views on languages. Java is certainly not my favourite language but it is absolutely a reasonable choice when it comes to develop complex applications (and as such used in 90% of banks) and for example.... Android... Lol.

Then hardware acceleration for cards (which has been invented maybe 25 years ago if I remember the voodoo) is not only for 3D.

Generally your understanding of techniques seems very limited so why bothering writing big rents?

Also, did you understand it is a beta? It is ok to not now what a beta is but you have a ton of disclaimers when you download. Just read them.

This statement demonstrates only one single point very convincingly:
You are no workstation software developer!

May be you develop games or web apps - but that's it

So your "message" doesn't hit me and ... btw. my "suggestion" of c and c++ surely comes not from my missing knowledge of software development!

[phantomverse]

Graphics performance is still terrible on 2017 5K intel iMac. Zero improvement on my end. Support said it’s because the CPU is under too much load (under 50% on Chee demo track) with the CPU load being the bottleneck. Doesn’t make any sense to me tbh. Other DAWs and plugins with GPU acceleration work as intended no matter how much the CPU is under load. Is anyone else having these issues?

[permeke]

just noticed the I/O button on the arrange window. Really cool. But perhaps it was already there since 5.0 ?

[Jac459]

The goal was to offload CPU processing of the GUI to the GPU to lessen overall CPU use, not making the graphics more flashy

Ok boys and girls, if I now need a full featured combined graphics high performance CPU high performance... this and that.....

offload CPU processing of the GUI to the GPU to lessen overall CPU use

this was surely not the question. My AMD graphics card, which also isn't installed with a fully compatible graphics driver (because I highly suspect there's non available (and guess why? What do you know how many different GPU's are already running out there? And how many different CPU's...? May be there are several times more types of GPU's running than CPU's...?!?
So my guess is, that simply a lot of graphics hardware never will get a 100% proper compatible set of drivers - that simple it is.
For Microsoft the manufacturers get cash in some way, making them write drivers for MS Windows right from the hardware's start. But Linux...?

This is my guess but... I refuse - on the other hand - to follow up all the wet dreams of especially manufacturers of hard- and software, because such a machine has to be payable. And I'm not the Billionaire looking for a fancy hobby - sorry. If for a DAW there's a need of several specific components, which are even not known to many people, then such a DAW becomes unusable for me - because I can't and even if - I'd refuse to - afford timely and financially to waste my resources for building such a "power machine" from scratch or buy a specially built one (for most likely an also very special price...).

And as long as I even don't know, if there is any compatible hardware fulfilling such demands like asked for there will be no more machine in my household running Bitwig Studio - period.

I want to make music, but I refuse to accept the participation in a race for compatible hardware.
Once tracker software made music on a text based screen. Now even a usual graphics card has to be replaced by a gamer card for proper 3D-performance...

Folks, in a reasonable DAW 3D capability simply is at least highly questionable If one only wants to make use of the multi core GPU for maths this shouldn't make 3D-capability necessary - right?
3D on the other hand in my eyes is a poor trial to give a technical opportunity to make something look more colorful, more "attractive" to new customers - what basically meets Bitwigs policy since a very long time... and that is permanently new invents instead of enhancing existing stuff to a high professional level. Bitwigs reality since a very long time: After invention almost everything is simply abandoned - there are numerous examples, what speaks the exact same language, because new stuff can be presented, while enhancing old stuff looks "too little new" and is less effective for new customers.

And if indeed performance is an issue: Why not coding the time critical components in an "adult" programming language and on a machine level (like C or at least c++ and like practiced by other DAW makers) instead of this 'Basic for pseudo-professionals' called "Java" ?!?!? Even c++ - if properly coded - makes by far faster software. But instead... we users are asked to buy more and more ... what kind of hardware?

Again: Nobody can tell me if there is a fully compatible graphics card present at all - right? On the other hand Bitwig wanted to offer a native-Linux DAW... so what?!?!? I guess, Bitwig even was on the "first promise, later perhaps regret" path long ago!

I can and will not risk to make my work machine unusable again for this dream. I will abandon Bitwig Studio long before, which is by far not the only existing DAW and... one of only a few asking me to install a gamer graphics card (which btw. I first have to find). Because there's one thing I surely will never do: Installing a new MS product - never again!
I depend on a proper running and reliable PC, but I'm not addicted to Bitwig Studio!

I think almost every developer in the world would burst laughing when reading your views on languages. Java is certainly not my favourite language but it is absolutely a reasonable choice when it comes to develop complex applications (and as such used in 90% of banks) and for example.... Android... Lol.

Then hardware acceleration for cards (which has been invented maybe 25 years ago if I remember the voodoo) is not only for 3D.

Generally your understanding of techniques seems very limited so why bothering writing big rents?

Also, did you understand it is a beta? It is ok to not now what a beta is but you have a ton of disclaimers when you download. Just read them.

This statement demonstrates only one single point very convincingly:
You are no workstation software developer!

May be you develop games or web apps - but that's it

So your "message" doesn't hit me and ... btw. my "suggestion" of c and c++ surely comes not from my missing knowledge of software development!

I am not developer (at least not anymore) at all.
I am managing director of a software engineering division for a bank (and more specialised in PowerPoint and excel frankly lol).

But:

In my work I review and purchase a lot of external software solutions. Start-ups, big FinTech as well as internal developments.

Almost all the UI are in java or .net/.net core or JavaScript.

So I am not expressing a personal preference but a fact on an industry standard.

You may prefere to use QT in C++ but how many developers will you find ?

By the way, you are a Dev, what IDE are you using? Eclipse? IntelliJ? Guess what is there underlying technology/language?

But if it makes you comfortable, the most of my developer life I was developing in C++ and I loved it.

And to be clear, I am NOT saying that C++ is not a great option for UI. It absolutely is. I am just saying that Java is ALSO a great choice and it isn't at all a bad choice or lazy choice from Bitwig as you pretend.

[krixa]

First update since 4.2 I'll actually consider renewing my license for

[mrfrenkie]

Another one. Why is the track zoom so discrete but the automation panel zoom on the same track is smooth? We are one step away from a normal vertical zoom but it is still not there.

Probably behaves this way to ease getting everything back to a uniform size across all tracks after you increase or decrease the size of one track. Imagine the OCD that would be triggered in so many people if they could never get that ONE track to match the size of everything else after increasing it's size to edit something. Make sense? haha

That's why Studio One has discrete vertical zoom options, while you can still smoothly zoom-in manually.