125 postsPage 4 of 7
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7
santeripilli wrote
In an ideal situation us, the paying clients, would not be required to go through complex processes to try and fix errors in software code.


Sure.
But: They said they fixed that Bug at a Release Note in 3.5.3 or 3.5.2.
It was`nt fixed. Means they really need help cause they can`t fix it. They just thought they did.
So they need at least our help helping them a bit.
Cause of this thread I´m happy now that I know what works for me. Better than nothing.
User avatar
by santeripilli on Thu May 24, 2018 3:44 pm
sebastianholtzer wrote
santeripilli wrote
In an ideal situation us, the paying clients, would not be required to go through complex processes to try and fix errors in software code.


Sure.
But: They said they fixed that Bug at a Release Note in 3.5.3 or 3.5.2.
It was`nt fixed. Means they really need help cause they can`t fix it. They just thought they did.
So they need at least our help helping them a bit.
Cause of this thread I´m happy now that I know what works for me. Better than nothing.


If this story is true, then we all know what this once again points to? Insufficient testing of the software. I speculate that there is no proper pre-release testing happening, which means PreSonus has to churn out a release every cycle despite a high possibility of bugs, then use the information provided by us paying customers after the release to patch the "sinking ship".

This, at this level we're witnessing here, is unethical IMHO.

But. Carry on, happy testing folks.
If you're content with this, you're content.

- Santeri

Apple MacBook Pro 13" (Early 2011):
2,7 GHz Intel Core i7
16 GB 1333 MHz DDR RAM, 500 GB HD (7200 RPM),
OSX version 10.12.4. (Sierra),

Interface: TC Electronic Konnekt 6 FireWire


Presonus Studio One 3, newest version, always (except when too buggy to work with daily).
User avatar
by erichansen4 on Thu May 24, 2018 7:21 pm
Sorry about not posting the version numbers. I should have done that. Here is my list again:

Slate Virtual Mix Rack 2.0.3.4
Slate Virtual Tape Machines 1.1.13.1
Slate Virtual Buss Compressors 1.2.11.1
Ozone 8 Advanced 8.01.961.WIN64
LiquidSonics Seventh Heaven Reverb 1.1.2
Sonar Works Reference x64 4.0.44.0
PreSonus VU Meter Latest from the PreSonus site
PreSonus Pro EQ Latsest from PreSonus

System Specs:
Windows 10 x64 1803 OS Build 17134.48
Nvidia GTX 780 388.13
RME HDSD 9652 version 4.21
iLok Version 4.0.3.74
Antelope Pure 2
Hardware version 6
Control Panel 1.1.10
Firmware 1.27

Intel i7 2600k
16GB Ram
Windows 10 64bit
Studio One 3.5.6
RME HDSP 9652 ASIO
Antelope Pure 2
User avatar
by sebastianholtzer on Thu May 24, 2018 11:06 pm
PreSonus Plug`s that match to Eric:

Pro EQ - latest from PreSonus
User avatar
by wdkbeats on Fri May 25, 2018 2:37 am
I tried to render a mix yesterday in Studio One 4 demo. It seems to me that the automation bug is even worse now, some panning and send level changes wasn't rendered at all... This is not good.

PC: Intel i7-4790K, 16GB RAM DDR3 1600Mhz CL9, MSI Z97-Gaming 5, Intel HD Graphics 4600, Super Flower Leadex - 80Plus Gold Modular 750W, SSD Samsung SSD840 EVO (OS), 2*WD Caviar Red 2TB SATA 3
OS: Windows 7 x64
DAW: Studio One Professional x64
Gear: RME Fireface 802, RME Advanced Remote, Focal Trio6 BE, Avantome Mixcubes, AKAI MPC Touch, AKAI Advance 61, Presonus Faderport, Beyerdynamic DT-990 Pro
User avatar
by jdurham on Fri May 25, 2018 5:46 am
@Santeri -- look, your general point is perfectly logical, but also completely not needed and unhelpful. OBVIOUSLY Presonus is getting a whole bunch of FREE help from us. And OBVIOUSLY in a perfect world, we'd want them to test things even more carefully before releasing them. We are not idiots. Bottom line is that ALL software has bugs, and even with the best developers in the world, there will still be bugs. Period. So we can sit around and wait for them to find things, or we can help out. You don't need to. You can benefit from our work. Simple as that.

And BTW, having used and owned almost every DAW, I can personally recount stories of EVERY DAW that match this issue or are far worse. And there are some DAW developers who have chronic bug issues and embarrassing release cycles, including the direct competitors to Studio One. So your criticism would be valid -- or even DOUBLY valid -- for those developers too. And yes, we all know it, and yes, it's a fact, and yes, ALL those developers are getting help from their PAYING customers for free, and YES it's annoying. But some of us still want to get things done, and this is the fastest way to do it. You can go ahead and wait around and make unhelpful, obvious observations all day if you want to. :-) Or you can join in when it suits you and do some extra testing. Either way is fine with me.
User avatar
by jdurham on Fri May 25, 2018 5:48 am
@Eric and @ Sebastian -- can you guys come up with a song file just with Ozone 8 AND built-in plugins that has the problem? If so, please post it, and I'll test it.
User avatar
by jdurham on Fri May 25, 2018 5:52 am
wdkbeats wroteI tried to render a mix yesterday in Studio One 4 demo. It seems to me that the automation bug is even worse now, some panning and send level changes wasn't rendered at all... This is not good.


Can you list ALL the plugins and their version numbers in the song, and also the version numbers of DAW, Windows, audio/video drivers, etc? The more info we have, the better chance at correlating something.

Also, if you can create a minimal song that has the issue, with a combination of plugins that other people have listed, then we can try to get confirmation. The idea here is to be able to create a song file that can be loaded and exhibit the same problem on someone ELSE's computer. If so, then we have the "repeatable" example that is so elusive that we can submit to the developers.
User avatar
by wdkbeats on Fri May 25, 2018 6:28 am
jdurham wrote
wdkbeats wroteI tried to render a mix yesterday in Studio One 4 demo. It seems to me that the automation bug is even worse now, some panning and send level changes wasn't rendered at all... This is not good.


Can you list ALL the plugins and their version numbers in the song, and also the version numbers of DAW, Windows, audio/video drivers, etc? The more info we have, the better chance at correlating something.

Also, if you can create a minimal song that has the issue, with a combination of plugins that other people have listed, then we can try to get confirmation. The idea here is to be able to create a song file that can be loaded and exhibit the same problem on someone ELSE's computer. If so, then we have the "repeatable" example that is so elusive that we can submit to the developers.


OK, I'll do that later.

In the mix I'm talking about the strange thing is that automation stopped being rendered at the end of a song - volume, pan automation and a delay throw to Echoboy at the very end are just not there after rendering (offline and online).

PC: Intel i7-4790K, 16GB RAM DDR3 1600Mhz CL9, MSI Z97-Gaming 5, Intel HD Graphics 4600, Super Flower Leadex - 80Plus Gold Modular 750W, SSD Samsung SSD840 EVO (OS), 2*WD Caviar Red 2TB SATA 3
OS: Windows 7 x64
DAW: Studio One Professional x64
Gear: RME Fireface 802, RME Advanced Remote, Focal Trio6 BE, Avantome Mixcubes, AKAI MPC Touch, AKAI Advance 61, Presonus Faderport, Beyerdynamic DT-990 Pro
User avatar
by jdurham on Fri May 25, 2018 6:52 am
wdkbeats wroteOK, I'll do that later.

In the mix I'm talking about the strange thing is that automation stopped being rendered at the end of a song - volume, pan automation and a delay throw to Echoboy at the very end are just not there after rendering (offline and online).


Cool, I don't have Echoboy, so either if someone else can test your file, or if you can create a version of the file with the built-in plugins or other plugins folks have listed in this forum, that would be really great.

BTW, I've got a lot of plugins, happy to test out a session if you have various 2CAudio, AAS, Cytomic, Eventide, Exponential Audio, FabFilter, iZotope, NI, PSP, Rob Papen, Spectrasonics, Steinberg, Synpase Audio, Synchro Arts, U-he, Waves, and many others... so chances are that if we have overlap then I can test your song file.

The SIMPLER your test file, the better though. We want to distill the problem down the smallest possible scenario to make the most effective bug report.

Again, the main thing is to create a repeatable, portable file that can replicate the problem on other people's computers. If that happens, then we can create a REALLY strong bug report that the developers can bite into.

As of right now, I personally have NOT had the automation issue. So I'm really hoping someone can send me a file to trigger the problem!
User avatar
by sebastianholtzer on Fri May 25, 2018 9:46 am
jdurham wrote
wdkbeats wroteOK, I'll do that later.

In the mix I'm talking about the strange thing is that automation stopped being rendered at the end of a song - volume, pan automation and a delay throw to Echoboy at the very end are just not there after rendering (offline and online).


The SIMPLER your test file, the better though. We want to distill the problem down the smallest possible scenario to make the most effective bug report.



Then it would be best to take someone others, cause my one is definetly too large and complex. Even Jpettit told me in an older thread.

But if someone is giving you his files, without knowing who you are, there is still a risk for him. Think you should give the Guys at least an adress to where you living, and eventually making a contract with them. Me for myself, I would like to know where you living and I would like to make a blind test then, looking who opens the door and so on. I mean everything could happen - for both parts and this is`nt funny then anymore. People are crazy sometimes. I would suggest they trash their midifiles then or so one. Don`t know. Your thing. Not mine anymore.
User avatar
by jdurham on Fri May 25, 2018 9:53 am
Right, no one wants their raw music files to be given to a stranger in a forum, least of all me. I wouldn't do that myself. I guess I assumed people would create a more generic version. :-) So the easy solution while still making it accessible to everyone: Just replace the midi events and audio files with something else, etc... And yes, if your file is too complex, it won't be that helpful or worth the time... too many variables to unwind.

So it's best if whoever is having the problem can CREATE a new file that exhibits the problem or SIMPLIFY and anonymize an existing file. Either way, the simpler the better! All we're trying to do here is create a portable, repeatable situation. However we get there is fine, but no one wants or is suggesting that copyrighted or personal material should be floated out to strangers.
User avatar
by sebastianholtzer on Fri May 25, 2018 12:25 pm
jdurham wroteRight, no one wants their raw music files to be given to a stranger in a forum, least of all me. I wouldn't do that myself. I guess I assumed people would create a more generic version. :-) So the easy solution while still making it accessible to everyone: Just replace the midi events and audio files with something else, etc... And yes, if your file is too complex, it won't be that helpful or worth the time... too many variables to unwind.

So it's best if whoever is having the problem can CREATE a new file that exhibits the problem or SIMPLIFY and anonymize an existing file. Either way, the simpler the better! All we're trying to do here is create a portable, repeatable situation. However we get there is fine, but no one wants or is suggesting that copyrighted or personal material should be floated out to strangers.


I completely forgot that everyone can press the Initialize Function on the Synth. Without knowing the Person at the other end this makes it much easier for me to decide what I give away.
Yes...my thought was the same like yours. Changing the Midifiles a bit before giving you that files makes it safer for everyone who`s involved.

We could decide by selecting the Track, who`s got the lowest Track and Channel count.
This would be fair for you and would make most sense I think.
I got 68 Tracks and 133 Channels @ 9:11 minutes.
User avatar
by jdurham on Fri May 25, 2018 12:35 pm
sebastianholtzer wrote68 Tracks and 133 Channels @ 9:11 minutes.


lol, yeah, let's try to come up with a simpler file for the test!

Another suggestion -- is it possible for you to start stripping that project down, a couple of tracks/channels/plugins at a time, and see if the problem persists each time you reduce it? I know this can take time, but if you can methodically reduce your project to the lowest size/complexity possible that still exhibits the problem, that might reveal a lot of clues, then I (or someone else) can confirm the file so we can get a really good repeatable bug report out of it.

P.S. And while you're stripping it down/reducing it, you can replace any special audio events or midi notes with something generic so you will feel comfortable sharing the file.
User avatar
by sebastianholtzer on Fri May 25, 2018 3:58 pm
jdurham wrote
sebastianholtzer wrote68 Tracks and 133 Channels @ 9:11 minutes.


lol, yeah, let's try to come up with a simpler file for the test!

Another suggestion -- is it possible for you to start stripping that project down, a couple of tracks/channels/plugins at a time, and see if the problem persists each time you reduce it? I know this can take time, but if you can methodically reduce your project to the lowest size/complexity possible that still exhibits the problem, that might reveal a lot of clues, then I (or someone else) can confirm the file so we can get a really good repeatable bug report out of it.

P.S. And while you're stripping it down/reducing it, you can replace any special audio events or midi notes with something generic so you will feel comfortable sharing the file.


Not sure.
User avatar
by Strom on Sat May 26, 2018 2:47 am
Ok, joining in :-)
I first stumbled upon this problem a few months ago. I recently bought Softube's Tape and of course put it all over the song I have been working on ;-)
I also wanted the song to end with a tapestop effect and was happy that the Tape plugin had such a feature. So I automated the 'stop' button with Tape as Insert on the MasterBus.
I exported the song - and the tapestop at the end wasn't included in the mixdown file. Didn't thought too much about it. At least I tried on thing - I mixed down only the last few bars of the song - and.. you know what - the automation was included. I pasted the 'correct' ending with the tapestop over the rest of the song and was fine with it.

The last few weeks I was working on the final stages of a new song - with a lot of automation - the most noticeable is a filtersweep.
And this time I wanted to master the song in a project in Studio One.
So I generated a "Mastering" file and exported it into the project... and there it was - without the automation - no filtersweep.
I looked here at the forum and found this threat, learned about the issue - and started 'shaking the box' - hoping that this annoying problem would be fixed in Studio One 4.
After finishing the song two days ago - I installed Studio One 4.
Loaded the song - and just exported it - there it was: filtersweep included.
So I thought the issue have been fixed...

But as to read here - it obviously hasn't.

So - I grabbed a coffee - and just figured out at least this:
(I use V3 and V4 for the Studio One versions)

All without touching the mixdown dialog window!

    Opened the song in V3 - exported it directly from the song page ->Song->Export Mixdown
    The mixdown window froze at 2:43 Min from 6:10 Min - Automation/Filtersweep included!!!
    (so this already worked in V3 - didn't notice because I only worked with the 'mastering file')

    Openend the mastering project with the included mastering file of the song - and updated the file - the mixdown dialog appeared but froze instantly without displaying anything - just a black box - but the mixdown process went on - Automation/Filtersweep NOT included!!!

    Went back to the song page and used the function Song->Update Mastering File
    The mixdown window appeared and froze at 2:40 Min from 6:10 Min - I went to the project page - Automation/Filtersweep included!!!

To make it short - I tried the same in V4 - saved the song as a new version - all the same results.

So there must be a different handling of the mixdown functions from the song page and from the project page - that much I can tell now - and that hasn't changed from V3 to V4.

I looked there is not automation around 2:40 Min in the song - and what ever it is that freezes the dialog from that moment on.
The automated filtersweep starts around 4:50 Min.
The automated filter plugin is Arturia Mini-Filter.

So as much I'd like to narrow that problem down to the 'updating master file' from the project page - I can remember that the first issue with the tapestop I mentioned - accured with the 'regular' export function from the song page :-(
Sadly I don't have that song file anymore to replicate it.

The most annoying part is - that you never know - will it be included - will it not?!?
The filtersweep is quite obvious to notice - but detail automation, volumes rides etc etc - how to check all this with every export?!?!

Anyways - I hope we find a solution to this...

Have a great weekend
Lars.
Last edited by Strom on Sun May 27, 2018 9:00 am, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
by jdurham on Sat May 26, 2018 7:26 am
Another little piece of info to throw into the party:

This morning I spent a little time creating a simple test file to push automation in S1 and see if I could get the automation problem to show up. My file is VERY simple, so I will do another round another day to make it more complex. But I did NOT see the automation issue come up. I'll try again soon.

Tested on Studio One 3.5.6 and 4.0.0 on Win 10 Pro:

64x audio tracks/channels
32x Ozone 8 (all modules engaged, eq+dynamics+vintage comp+vintage tape+post eq+maximzer)
96x Fat Channel (all modules active, hpf/gate+compressor+eq+limter)
64x Pro EQ (all bands engaged)
32x Mixtool (to invert channel pairs)

Tons of automation on channel volume, pan, and various effect parameters. A total of 352x lanes of automation.

If we count individual modules in O8 and Fat Channel, that adds up to 192x O8 modules + 384x Fat Channel modules.

Very heavy CPU load, screen started getting laggy, but playback and export still worked fine.

HOWEVER, NO NOTICEABLE AUTOMATION ISSUES ON EXPORT MIXDOWN.

I built the test file in channel pairs so that each channel pair would invert and null each other. So the final mixdown would be silence. The final file nulled out to about -129dB, which is about as good as one can expect, given hundreds of plugin modules with varying degrees of emulations that might have some aspect of randomness in their algorithms.

Again, I know this file was extremely simple in terms of routing, and it used only 4 different plugins, but at least on my system, it didn't show the automation issue so far. Obviously, this doesn't prove anything about the automation issue. So I'm not doubting people who have the issue. My little test is just one more piece of data as I personally try to force the automation problem myself on my system, so I will try making a more complex routing and adding a variety of different plugins in a future test.

If anyone can create a file that has the automation issue and is willing to share it with me (and assuming I have the same plugins), I'll gladly test it. I have not yet seen this problem show up on my system.
User avatar
by santeripilli on Sat May 26, 2018 10:34 am
jdurham wrote CLIP!

Bottom line is that ALL software has bugs, and even with the best developers in the world, there will still be bugs.

CLIP

And BTW, having used and owned almost every DAW, I can personally recount stories of EVERY DAW that match this issue or are far worse. And there are some DAW developers who have chronic bug issues and embarrassing release cycles, including the direct competitors to Studio One. So your criticism would be valid -- or even DOUBLY valid -- for those developers too.


Just wanted to say that my observation doesn't match with yours. I cannot relate to this.

Having a commercial company completely outsource their "quality management" to an user forum, a forum where even the active moderators work for free, is unheard of. If you've noticed this sort of ridiculousness happens elsewhere to this extent that it's happened in the S1 v3 development, could you please PM me? I would like to know more, if you have time.

This is a highly unethical business practice, that needs to change.

Cheers!


- Santeri

Apple MacBook Pro 13" (Early 2011):
2,7 GHz Intel Core i7
16 GB 1333 MHz DDR RAM, 500 GB HD (7200 RPM),
OSX version 10.12.4. (Sierra),

Interface: TC Electronic Konnekt 6 FireWire


Presonus Studio One 3, newest version, always (except when too buggy to work with daily).
User avatar
by jdurham on Sat May 26, 2018 11:02 am
santeripilli wrote
jdurham wrote CLIP!

Bottom line is that ALL software has bugs, and even with the best developers in the world, there will still be bugs.

CLIP

And BTW, having used and owned almost every DAW, I can personally recount stories of EVERY DAW that match this issue or are far worse. And there are some DAW developers who have chronic bug issues and embarrassing release cycles, including the direct competitors to Studio One. So your criticism would be valid -- or even DOUBLY valid -- for those developers too.


Just wanted to say that my observation doesn't match with yours. I cannot relate to this.

Having a commercial company completely outsource their "quality management" to an user forum, a forum where even the active moderators work for free, is unheard of. If you've noticed this sort of ridiculousness happens elsewhere to this extent that it's happened in the S1 v3 development, could you please chat about it a bit further. I would like to know more, if you have time.

This needs to stop, or taken further. Investigated.

I'm pretty sure what you found obvious in my post might not be for everyone.

Cheers!


- Santeri


Hi Santeri,

Not to take this thread off topic or get into a wasted back-and-forth, since this automation problem is something that definitely impacts people, but I'll comment once more and if you want the last word, it's all yours.

I am NOT disputing that software developers should be testing their products more extensively. And Presonus and every other DAW developer are all clearly getting a bunch of people to help them out for FREE with these kinds of threads. In a perfect world, we wouldn't have to do this. Indeed we don't have to. It's a personal choice. You and I may see this differently, but it's just a choice. Life with go on either way.

As for a commercial company "completely" outsourcing their quality management to a user forum, that's not what's happening here. Presonus has IMO a decent quality management process, but it is clearly not up to your standard, and I understand what you mean in general. But this does not rise to an ethics issue IMO. If so, then I think that every DAW developer would be guilty or far worse. But also note that I am not trying to justify any shortcomings of the development process. There is always room for improvement.

All I'm saying is that we can either wait around for them to discover and fix things by themselves, or we can be part of the process. Some people don't mind helping out, others do. This particular problem appears to be VERY elusive. I can't replicate it yet myself. But since I'm moving my studio projects over to Studio One, I really want this issue to be resolved. So I'm willing to spend a little time on it so it doesn't bite me when I'm with a client. So far, I haven't had the problem though.

As for different DAWs doing the same or worse in their release process, my comment about owning and/or using just about every other DAW is more my own personal point of reference for how egregious the sins of Presonus really are, relatively speaking. And relatively speaking, I can relate stories that are far worse than this automation issue with regard to Cubase, Pro Tools, Logic, and on and on.

And as for community involvement in a commercial DAW, if you're a Reaper user, you'll know how much the Reaper community is intrinsically involved in Reaper's testing, for example, which probably takes the crown for blurring the lines you're talking about.

Anyway, I don't want to waste thread space, and frankly I want to apologize if I came across as irritated in my initial response to you. I'd rather be constructive. And I think you and I agree on the basic theory, just disagree on the relative approach and whether or not ethics are involved at this level. As a theory, I think it's generally agreed by most sane software users that we DON'T want to be spending our time helping debug software. So we're in agreement there. I just want this problem to be solved, and it's *clearly* a very elusive issue. I just put together a test this morning that would tax any computer with tons of automation, and it did NOT have the automation issue, And it in fact showed me that Studio One 4.0.0 was actually just as stable as 3.5.6 under a solid CPU load for that test project. That's actually a testament to Presonus' overall good quality management IMO.

Anyway, take care and you have the last word!
User avatar
by wdkbeats on Sun May 27, 2018 4:52 am
I believe this bug is related to Slate Digital plugins, VMR 2.0 to be specific. I started having the same issue just after installing the latest Slate plugins bundle.

"Shaking the box" indeed does help, tried it yesterday and my mix rendered correctly (it didn't without "shaking")

I wonder if it's related to the copy&paste automation bug? Sometimes Studio One just doesn't paste automation in folder tracks.

PC: Intel i7-4790K, 16GB RAM DDR3 1600Mhz CL9, MSI Z97-Gaming 5, Intel HD Graphics 4600, Super Flower Leadex - 80Plus Gold Modular 750W, SSD Samsung SSD840 EVO (OS), 2*WD Caviar Red 2TB SATA 3
OS: Windows 7 x64
DAW: Studio One Professional x64
Gear: RME Fireface 802, RME Advanced Remote, Focal Trio6 BE, Avantome Mixcubes, AKAI MPC Touch, AKAI Advance 61, Presonus Faderport, Beyerdynamic DT-990 Pro

125 postsPage 4 of 7
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: toddjenkins and 9 guests