It’s fine in that it’s consistent once you set the threshold, but their chosen spot for the “note” is different than what a user would expect. I’m sure people will reply with arguments to the contrary, but the fact is Audio Bend’s approach will always be slightly off relative to every other program and even other parts of Studio One. There’s been a lot of posts and feature requests about it.

robertgray3 wroteIt’s fine in that it’s consistent once you set the threshold, but their chosen spot for the “note” is different than what a user would expect. I’m sure people will reply with arguments to the contrary, but the fact is Audio Bend’s approach will always be slightly off relative to every other program and even other parts of Studio One. There’s been a lot of posts and feature requests about it.

Got ya! What are the feature requests for? Are people asking to refine it?

mikesupina wrote

robertgray3 wroteIt’s fine in that it’s consistent once you set the threshold, but their chosen spot for the “note” is different than what a user would expect. I’m sure people will reply with arguments to the contrary, but the fact is Audio Bend’s approach will always be slightly off relative to every other program and even other parts of Studio One. There’s been a lot of posts and feature requests about it.

Got ya! What are the feature requests for? Are people asking to refine it?

Sounds like about 80 people or so were voting for them to change it to allow for results that are more in line with every other DAW. You can click on the link and see more, vote on it, etc.

Sometimes voted requests for little refinements like that get done quickly, sometimes they take a long time. It depends on the number of votes and whether or not the team understands why the current behavior is suboptimal. I've actually had a lot better luck with feature additions than feature adjustments.

robertgray3 wroteSounds like about 80 people or so were voting for them to change it to allow for results that are more in line with every other DAW. You can click on the link and see more, vote on it, etc.

Sometimes voted requests for little refinements like that get done quickly, sometimes they take a long time. It depends on the number of votes and whether or not the team understands why the current behavior is suboptimal. I've actually had a lot better luck with feature additions than feature adjustments.

I bet we'd see a lot more votes if that part of the Presonus site were more user-friendly and curated to remove/merge duplicates for the same basic issue.

As it is, though, it's hard as HELL to find anything in that portion of the site to see whether someone else has already started a good vote thread on an issue. So people either shrug and leave, or they create an entirely new thread for something that 15 other people already created threads for the same exact problem. As a result, votes get spread out and diluted, giving Presonus the wrong impression of what seems to be a compelling need among their user base.

Another big problem is that Presonus doesn't remove old issues that they've already fixed.

TL;DR - I've stopped caring about or using that section of the site. It's way more time and frustration than it's worth. I see compelling everyday bread-and-butter issues listed there since forever with practically no votes.

Baphometrix wroteIt's way more time and frustration than it's worth. I see compelling everyday bread-and-butter issues listed there since forever with practically no votes.

Exactly. A valid point about day-to-day usability such as “range editing folder bus automation should not cause edits on other tracks” is shoved in between six posts of “what is the red light on my interface blinking PRESONUS help”

It’s like a beachfront city holding an election via stuffing messages in bottles and throwing them out to sea.

Yes, it's tricky to get the markers exactly where you want them for drum replacement.

I've also used Addictive Trigger (an add on from XLN, the folks that make Addictive Drums) and sometimes it does a better job. The problem with it is that you can't manually adjust any of the hits it detects, you just have to dump them onto a midi track and then manipulate the midi. I've also used Melodyne to do this, but it seems even more fidgety (been a while since I tried Melo, and I've learned more about it, so probably need to try this again).

I wish there was a better way to accurately do drum hits.

I am a drummer and what I do is play the parts myself, record the acoustic drums, do all my production of those to get it to sound as good as I possibly can. Then I map midi tracks for every drum, including hihats and cymbals to exactly replicate the acoustic drum tracks.

I use these tracks to blend in AD2 or samples for every piece of the kit. It's all very subtle with about 80-90% of the sound coming from the acoustic drum recordings. The 10-20% add in is more like FX that are placed on all the drums to achieve the desired sound. So it preserves the original drum performance but enhances the sound of the drums.

This requires every piece of the kit to be meticulously mapped, otherwise you get doubling or flam'ing of sounds.

It's a lot of work and some times in the end I just use the original acoustic recording 100%, but it's nice to blend in something like AD2 and cycle through kits and sounds to see if anything improves the sound.

gabo

garybowling wroteYes, it's tricky to get the markers exactly where you want them for drum replacement.

I've also used Addictive Trigger (an add on from XLN, the folks that make Addictive Drums) and sometimes it does a better job. The problem with it is that you can't manually adjust any of the hits it detects, you just have to dump them onto a midi track and then manipulate the midi. I've also used Melodyne to do this, but it seems even more fidgety (been a while since I tried Melo, and I've learned more about it, so probably need to try this again).

I wish there was a better way to accurately do drum hits.

I am a drummer and what I do is play the parts myself, record the acoustic drums, do all my production of those to get it to sound as good as I possibly can. Then I map midi tracks for every drum, including hihats and cymbals to exactly replicate the acoustic drum tracks.

I use these tracks to blend in AD2 or samples for every piece of the kit. It's all very subtle with about 80-90% of the sound coming from the acoustic drum recordings. The 10-20% add in is more like FX that are placed on all the drums to achieve the desired sound. So it preserves the original drum performance but enhances the sound of the drums.

This requires every piece of the kit to be meticulously mapped, otherwise you get doubling or flam'ing of sounds.

It's a lot of work and some times in the end I just use the original acoustic recording 100%, but it's nice to blend in something like AD2 and cycle through kits and sounds to see if anything improves the sound.

gabo

I feel ya! The most reliable and accurate I've found so far is Massey DRT, but it only works in Pro Tools, as it's an Audio Suite plugin. It works really, really well, and is very simple.

Check out this video tutorial - it may help….

https://youtu.be/Y-_ioaFmgl4