Laurent,

I'm certainly aware of the EXS24's streaming capabilities and it's good to hear that it might soon be able to support crossfading between vel-layers and other Giga-features.

But my concern was actually the fact that an EXS24 based system cannot not be as easily expanded as a Giga system. In case one computer is not enough to handle the amount of patches you want to use simultaneously, you can simply put another PC into your studio and run another Gigastudio on it. That's the way it is supposed to be. You can of course use another computer and get a second license to run Logic+EXS24 on it (using another Gigastudios requires another license, too), but a Logic system is simply not meant not be expanded in such a way (i.e. controlling the EXS-instruments on the second system from computer No.1...no more sample accurate timing; even though Giga does not offer this at all).

Unless we will see something like Systemlink for Logic I don't see the EXS24 as the best solution if your single-computer-system runs out of power.

I for one would rather upgrade my computer than have to get a second one just because it can't do all i want it to.... [:)]
Nigel

>>>I for one would rather upgrade my computer than have to get a second one just because it can't do all i want it to.... <<<

Might work sometimes depending on your needs but even the fastest computer available right now will only give you the power to use just a small glimpse of a huge library like VSL.

BTW: Did you read the interview with Hans Zimmer in SOS? He uses 10 (ten) Giga-PCs for his libraries. And he mentioned that Klaus Badelt (Gladaitor, Time Machine, K19..) uses 40 (in words: forty)

""BTW: Did you read the interview with Hans Zimmer in SOS? He uses 10 (ten) Giga-PCs for his libraries. And he mentioned that Klaus Badelt (Gladaitor, Time Machine, K19..) uses 40 (in words: forty)""

and 5 assistants [[;)]]

[:D]

Mery Christmas and a happy & peaceful new year!

-timo-

So what if Han Zimmer uses all that hardware? Am I supposed to be impressed by his money? Sure, if you have the dollars you can buy all kinds of impressive hardware. I am more impressed by someone on a budget who works wonders.

@Bruce said:

Is the Vienna Library programmed for E-Magic Windows or Mac versions? With Apple's announcement that it will not be supporting PC's this might be an issue for some.

as the library is not a *program* (aka application) it makes no difference on which platform you use it

the unpleasant thing about EXS is, that macOS9 does not support filenames longer than 31 letters and does not require file-extensions, while OSX and windows does [:(]

my two bits only: as big software-vendors like AVID, ALIAS or ADOBE can not afford to leave one of the platforms out, i'm pretty sure, also emagic has to continue supporting both, if they want to keep a significant market share ...

christian

Christian,

At NAMM, Emagic just announced Logic v6, for Mac OS9 an OSX only. I think they continued with some support for windows with Logic 5.5, but this has now ended with v6.

http://www.emagic.de/english/news/2003/logic6/index.html
and
http://namm.harmony-central.com/WNAMM03/Content/Emagic/PR/Logic-6.html

@musos said:

... some support for windows with Logic 5.5, but this has now ended with v6.

as well as i've been annoyed by the lack of current drivers for their unitor-family, i read the announcments since a while ... but still can not believe.

christian

I also am very disturbed by this ridiculous corporate decision to ignore reality by Emagic. Reality, whether that company likes it or not, is Windows. Not MAC. Even though I realize fully that MAC is superior to Windows. Just like Beta was superior to VHS. Anyone remember what happened to Beta? I do. I had a thousand beta tapes. However, there are many people who have a monetary stake in Windows, and it is STUPID to ignore them. Emagic is LOSING MONEY and as businessmen they are quite simply, idiots. You can quote me on that.

@William said:

... many people who have a monetary stake in Windows, and it is STUPID to ignore them. Emagic is LOSING MONEY ...

don't get me wrong - i do not have any reservations against any platform
my point of view is: even companies like emagic and apple have limited ressources and let's face it: apple had to do a lot of development in the last years.

avid has stopped it's development for mac some years ago (because of several reasons regarding hardware-issues) and lost a big part of mac-users - meanwhile their video-procucts are available again for both platforms.
just consider, emagic has currently to develop already for two platforms (OS9 and OSX) and it is understandable, they do this task first.

avid is offering it's 3D-products meanwhile on three platforms (windows, irix and linux) and roumors say, they are willing to support OSX too.
no company can get away ourdays with a restriction of their support for multiple platforms, otherwise they will be out of business very quickly.

to cite another roumor: maybe emagic is waiting on OSX for PCs to rationalize the development-process - who knows, i'll stay tuned

christian

You're absolutely right about that, Christian. I guess it is a problem with the practicality of using various platforms, etc. After all, this is truly a cutting edge technology, and one cannot expect an instant solution to problems. Thanks for your expert opinon.

Sincerely,
William

@Another User said:

I also am very disturbed by this ridiculous corporate decision to ignore reality by Emagic. Reality, whether that company likes it or not, is Windows. Not MAC. Even though I realize fully that MAC is superior to Windows.

I believe the things Emagic wished to do with Logic could not be accomplished on Windows. Apple invested a lot and brought in some very heavy-weight (in the audio/midi world) programmers to make the audio and MIDI services in OSX top notch. Unlike MS, audio and MIDI is a large chunk of Apple's business, and they want to keep those customers happy.

If you're going to be a multi-platform company, feature parity is VERY important. If one platform doesn't offer the performance and features of the other platform, the users of the lesser performing platform get very upset. I've seen this happen many times. Of the digital audio workstation companies that are attempting to be multi-platform, most that I know of are struggling to have parity, and few have been able to do it. For instance, Windows users of Digidesign PT systems have been upset for a long time. Mac users of Cubase are not happy. If you examine things historically, the choice to be multi-platform has even forced companies out of business (e.g. Opcode's decision to do a Windows version of Vision was the beginning of their slide into oblivion).

Don't worry about Emagic. If they continue to provide the exquisite tool they're providing, with capabilities far exceeding their competition, people will be willing to buy a Mac to run it.

Consider this: I'm a die-hard Mac user (can you tell? [;)]) but I built up two powerful PC's this summer to run GigaStudio. I really wished GS had been available on the Mac, but it wasn't, so I did what I had to do. (Although, watching how Tascam has been running that once promising application into the ground by poor support, promotion, lack of bug fixes, and lack of timely upgrades is making me wonder if I made a mistake.)

At any rate, my feeling is that if an application knocks me out, I'm going to find a way to buy the hardware to run it.

Lee Blaske

@Another User said:

If you're going to be a multi-platform company, feature parity is VERY important. If one platform doesn't offer the performance and features of the other platform, the users of the lesser performing platform get very upset. I've seen this happen many times. Of the digital audio workstation companies that are attempting to be multi-platform, most that I know of are struggling to have parity, and few have been able to do it. For instance, Windows users of Digidesign PT systems have been upset for a long time. Mac users of Cubase are not happy. If you examine things historically, the choice to be multi-platform has even forced companies out of business (e.g. Opcode's decision to do a Windows version of Vision was the beginning of their slide into oblivion).

No way!...I mean...I disagree [:)] . For every company you tell me that fell into oblivion for trying to go multi-platform I will mention two that fell into oblivion for closing themselves into one. Flexibility of use into differnt contexts and sytems is the key of any major production nowadays. Linux is starting to slowly give BIG bites into graphics apps appearing in major production companies rigs (WETA for LOTR saga, for instance) because of its sheer flexibility. Any serious app has to be able to be used in different computers with minimum to no difference on its interface. Closing lines into one OS will only make you disappear if/when/as soon as the OS company makes a bad move.

The reason I´m open to other explanations is that audio isn´t really my strong field and if I came talking ex cathedra I could be corrected by someone with way more knowledge than me.

Now, computer graphics IS my business, and I know for sure several apps, such as the high-end composition app Shake, have been uh...assimilated into Apple. New version of Shake won´t exist for Windows, but funnily enough they are making one for Linux at twice the price of the Mac version. Know what? that´s not because of PC features, that´s Apple vs Microsoft in all its freaking glory.

Logic stuff really resembles "Apple vs Microsoft" theory way more than hidden Mac features. A logical move on Apple, but could be too expensive for Emagic. Time will tell.

As I already mentioned I´m open to other explanations which prove I´m wrong, and in fact, it would be a relief reading them, but I couldn´t help thinking that your post was a bit driven both by your Mac "fannness" and/or bad PC experiences. I appologize if this wasn´t the case.

Actually I think both of these opposing viewpoints are very informative. It's true that Macs have always been great for both audio and graphics. But it's also true that Apple's near demise was due to isolating itself from the world. Isn't it true, to put it simply, that both systems have qualities and failings? I've come to the conclusion I probably need to use both. For example, Vegas Video for Windows is the most perfect conceivable NLE, does more than Final Cut Pro costing twice as much and works flawlessly. On the other hand, my Gigastudio discs right now make some fine coasters.

It's impossible to have a rough 40 to 80 gigabyte ready to be triggered by one PC or Mac. plus the use of plugins, and many audio tracks at the same time.
So what is the use of being able to use only a tiny part of the whole library, even if it gives you better options (total recall)

That is the reality (at this moment) with the enormous size of the Cube alone, not to mention the Performance addition, and later the Pro edition.


EXS looks nice to me on paper, in reality I need to see (hear) first.

Geert.

@Another User said:

It's impossible to have a rough 40 to 80 gigabyte ready to be triggered by one PC or Mac. plus the use of plugins, and many audio tracks at the same time.

Actually, it should be possible with the new "Freeze" technology coming in Logic 6.0. Only the elements you are actively working on need to be live, and actually using DSP and memory resources. You Freeze the other tracks which are rendered in the background and simply played back as audio tracks. At any point, you can un-Freeze a track and edit it further.

This is all supposed to happen seamlessly in the background on OSX, and looks like a very creative solution. We'll see how it works when we get our hands on it, but the reports I've read from people who attended NAMM and saw it in action were very positive.

Lee Blaske

@William said:

Reality, whether that company likes it or not, is Windows. Not MAC. Even though I realize fully that MAC is superior to Windows. Just like Beta was superior to VHS. Anyone remember what happened to Beta? I do. I had a thousand beta tapes. However, there are many people who have a monetary stake in Windows, and it is STUPID to ignore them. Emagic is LOSING MONEY and as businessmen they are quite simply, idiots. You can quote me on that.

I agree with some of this. No manufacturer should ever ignore an entire platform. Especially one so huge as Windows. And it's not as if Windows is nonviable. You kind of get the feeling that this is the "revenge of the MAC junkies" for all that software on Windows that never made it to the MAC.
However, I am not prepared to say that MAC has no part in reality. It has its niche, and always will. BETAcam found its niche in the pro-video market. I'd be willing to bet that MAC's market will stay a good deal stronger than BETA's though. Graphics professionals (I am one of these [:)] ), publishers, and printers are hooked on the MAC, and always will be.
Personally, I can and do use both platforms, but all my audio hardware and software is set up on Windows. I can't afford to simply switch. So for me it seems like it's Gigastudio or nothing. And I just have to wait until 3.0 before deciding whether to take the HD sampling plunge. Isn't there an antitrust law that can do something about that . . . ?

~Chris

Chris wrote:

@Another User said:

So for me it seems like it's Gigastudio or nothing. And I just have to wait until 3.0 before deciding whether to take the HD sampling plunge. Isn't there an antitrust law that can do something about that . . . ?

If there was, that same law could be used to force Tascam to release a Mac version of GigaStudio. [:)]

Lee Blaske