Betâ devices section !

Audiographe · Post by **Audiographe** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:04 am

Lolo,
Can one create a section betâ for the devices ?
I am lost with the betâ updates, final version ; )
@+

Post by **hubird** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:40 am

great announcement...

katano · Post by **katano** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:12 am

but a good idea...

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:25 am

jeah thas a good idea

Post by **hubird** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:43 am

Quote from our moderator:

Hey folks,

Please let's try to keep this forum just for important announcements. There's other forums for general discussion, questions, etc!

katano · Post by **katano** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 5:45 am

let's move it to the general discussion section then...

Shroomz~> · Post by **Shroomz~>** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 6:15 am

In the case of sharc & I, it would be easy to simply not call them a beta, but that won't mean they won't get updated.

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:15 am

hey shroomz,

I wouldn`t call your mixer a 0.1 beta, its more a 0.95b version

Shroomz~> · Post by **Shroomz~>** » Fri Feb 23, 2007 8:33 am

I'll take that as a compliment ankyurvarymushroom

petal · Post by **petal** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:38 pm

I kind of agree with the intention of this thread.

I love the fact that we have many new inspired developers and I thank them for making their efforts available to us all!

But there is a need for a place to put beta-devices in order to keep stable and unstable devices apart. The amount of beta-versions of the same device can get really high in some cases, so my vote is:

Yes please!

Thomas

Mr Arkadin · Post by **Mr Arkadin** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:17 pm

Yes, i totally lost track of where McCyrano got to with his devices in the end - it was 'a bit all over the place'

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 1:36 pm

btw it would be also nice if there was some kind of ranking and sections for the device section....

Sections: compressor, EQ, distortion, delay, synths.....

ranking sorting: devices with many downloads appear on first page, so a newcomers can easily get the most important devices quickly....

just an idea.

Shroomz~> · Post by **Shroomz~>** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:05 pm

If you want a beta device forum which lies mostly empty, go for it.

valis · Post by **valis** » Mon Feb 26, 2007 5:19 pm

Perhaps a better solution would be to establish some guidelines for those posting devices to the Devices section that address this issue.

Imo, the practice of updating the same device thread is a good one, as is naming topics v0.1b or some such, especially from aspiring developers. Keeping up with the thread in question shouldn't be too hard for developers, just by keeping local bookmarks in their browser or better yet shortcuts in their local project directories for each device submission. Better yet adding the same shortcut to the device download, either as a url in the 'readme' associated with the zip archive or some other method. This might necessitate making the thread before posting the device, or immediately reposting the device & using temp upload to start the thread so that the url can be gotten in the first place.

All of the downloads that I get for Creamware (and vst etc) go into a somewhat loosely organized archived section of my studio backup server, and I do try to maintain shortcuts for them all as well to combat issues like this. Things don't usually get updated on my working installs until I do a major effort to reinstall or clean things out.

Just my 2cents...

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 8:26 am

Yes, i totally lost track of where McCyrano got to with his devices in the end - it was 'a bit all over the place'

Oh, I just thought about posting a loose collection of my latest 10-20 new devices

and I also had that feeling: Is it good to post devices publically which are made for myself and I don't have the time to work on improvement-ideas? I don't have the time for betatesters too... because my time has become really short since a few weeks, so I also thought about the idea of posting them in a few month again, when I am more sure about kind of final stage of the devices...

Up to now I followed some basic principles:
- When it becomes too much, make a package out of the last versions. These are the knott-packages from which exist 4+1.
- After releasing the packages I put (I hope so) new versions in the same thread and left working old versions which could be more usefull also in the thread.
- With the last devices I tried to keep a beta number... but for me personally it makes no real sense with beta-numbers, because I make the devices for special purpose or realizing an idea which is done sufficiantly most of the time with the first 'release' and I then allready use that working special purpose device in a project so for me it is important to keep the old versions.
- I hope I left no version with any serious problems (btw. You have to lower the input (output of the ingoing device) of the MS device by 6db. The same for the output within the MS-device

)

I know that for someone who does not want to try out too much it must be confusing and not very motivationg trying out, which device out of 5 does what he/she wants, but for some of my devs this is exactly the way you have to handle it. I for myself will never know when beta turns to release status, because in that sense I never release a device, it is allways a spotlight in the developement process. Yesterday I made 4 different new dynamyth versions (not counted in the number above) for special purpose use, because I now own transient designer and was astonished to find that I like dynatube's attack handling MUCH better for some cases. The release thing is quite bad, but attack - manipulating is great with these 4 versions.

Now I also understand after some time not using a certain device how someone must feel using some of my devices the first time... It's difficult sometimes, but they all do what they should do

I have some nice versions of MuBaCo which do a great job, but I had the impression that there is not so much feedback which will lead to a kind of final version.

If there is a special problem with one desired device, maybe I could help

Martin

hifiboom · Post by **hifiboom** » Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:11 am

I think a structure like this would apply very weel especially to the modular corner, but also to the device section....

http://electro-music.com/forum/forum-44.html

scrolling through hundrets of pages can be quite annoying if you are searching for something specialized....

tgstgs · Post by **tgstgs** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 5:17 am

most of the devices in the device forum is unfinnished; sorry;
but its an beta forum;

even when this betas makes a special job well;

good vibes from vienna

MCCY · Post by **MCCY** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 8:06 am

When is a device finished?
(And what makes it necessary to finish it in this certain way)

Martin

tgstgs · Post by **tgstgs** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:03 am

better 1 optimized and tested + pdf ready for use than 10 that surprizes me in a livesituation;
you can handle known bugs or limitationes but you only know when its tested and reported;
beta is hlf the job and i feel sorry about those lovely devices not finished;
at least a txt file with spec overview;
best coffee without sugar

spending so much time in circuiting and surficing -
small texting is done in a few minutes;
developer testing all the way to the final dont?
so who then not he himself has honour to do

good vibes

petal · Post by **petal** » Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:48 am

I sense that this post produces a certain bitterness in our new developers, this was not my intent at all!

Once again I'd like to stress that I love the fact that we have active enthusiastic developers. The new trend is that they play ball with the community, which is also a very possitive thing, but it does have have certain side-effect as "works-in-progress" often do, it's a mess. Or at least it can be.

So what I suggest is either to keep a new "device in development" in one thread only and update the title and first post here or else lets have a "SDK-experientation"-section where theres room for the "lack of order" that experimention and development produces. When a new device is deemed "stable enough" it can then move to the devices-section.

It's just a suggestion, nothing more - Thomas