Logic Ate

Discussion in 'Digital Audio' started by Phillip K, Feb 21, 2007.

  1. Phillip K macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas Nevada
    #1
    I am a new guy here but am a reg on a certain forum where Logic has its home. There is no better way of introducing myself than with a juicy piece of information. I chose to do it here since if I posted there it would last about 30 seconds.

    I love the app and am anxious to see what kind of PT killer they will unleash. I think it has been so long a wait for this version because they are really doing a complete rewrite and this must be a huge undertaking.

    The point I want to make is that I have an acquaintance that is a certified trainer and he has told me that Apple has pulled the certifications of all trainers with a Logic 6 certification. He also said that this is only done when a new version is imminent as Apple wants to keep it trainers up to date with the most current versions.

    Also the thread at the LP7 forum about improving the manual was finally internalized by the mods saying that it was time to take the feedback and enter into the next stage of development of the manual. This would make sense since I am pretty sure the manual would be the last thing to work on to tie everything together in a written form.

    So, I think this long wait is almost over. I have a feeling it will make a debut about the same time as leopard.

     
  2. OldCorpse macrumors 65816

    OldCorpse

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    compost heap
    #2
    No offence, but I think it's too late for Logic.

    The original problem (before Apple aquired them) was that it has a lot of power, but was just abysmal wrt. the UI. No doubt fanbois will crawl out of the woodwork to defend it, but the brutal truth is that those who think the UI is just fine are folks who already invested a ton of time in mastering it, and as a result, to them it all seems "obvious"... not realizing and not remembering all the illLogic of the user interface... they're used to it, so they think it's just peachy.

    Now, any reasonably competent development team can make a simple app with little power. And any reasonably competent development can make a very powerful app with a very complex UI (and huge learning curve). It takes a rare genius to do both a very powerful app and a very easy/intuitive UI.

    The folks behind Logic, were sadly not those rare geniuses - they were the team that made a very powerful app with a horrendously steep learning curve and a nightmare of UI.

    At this point Apple have had this app for a few years. In that time, they have not done very much to simplify the UI (or indeed to fix many bugs). It's very disappointing - the hallmark of Apple is the combination of power and ease of use. You can tell, that Logic was not originally developed by Apple.

    My fear is that it's too late for Apple to do a radical overhaul of the UI. The reason is that really, they'd have to start from scratch - dump 100% of the UI as it is now, and start with a blank page. That takes way too long and given that there's already a built in user base for Logic, it doesn't make economic sense as return on investment. Sure, people will bitch, and many will defect to other DAWs, but on balance it's not economical for Apple to start from scratch.

    Therefore, whatever the promise of Logic 8 - I'm not holding my breath. Yeah, it'll be more powerful, maybe they'll fix bugs, surely they'll add features and sounds etc. But to me, that's not important - it's already plenty powerful - to me what would really matter is a brand new UI to blow me away by its simpicity, its intuitiveness, its Appleicousness. That won't happen. Bottom line: meh.
     
  3. Phillip K thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas Nevada
    #3
    Thats very ironic since that is exactly what I thinkt of Pro Tools.
    I started with Pro Tools and to quote you...

    " the brutal truth is that those who think the UI is just fine are folks who already invested a ton of time in mastering it, and as a result, to them it all seems "obvious"... not realizing and not remembering all the illlogic of the user interface... they're used to it, so they think it's just peachy"

    I do not think this app you are speaking of exists. Every PRO app is going to have a learning curve. If you want work at this level you have to be able to lean how it works. I found it quite logical compared to PT but I did not have to unlearn any other programs way of doing things.You cant fly the space shuttle with cesna controls.


    When Apple decided to make Logic their own, they had to make a business decision to either release a bug reduced version that was less than the Pro Flagship version they wanted it to be or work on the extended feature set and deal with the bugs at a later date. Of course they decided to deal with the bugs later but as a result we have Sculpture, Ultra Beat, ES2, 9 new effects plug ins including Guitar Amp Pro and a linear phase EQ. All the plug ins before acquisition had to be purchased separately so they had to be integrated along with Wave Burner. This brought the total to 70 plug ins and 34 instrument plug ins. This is the most comprehensive collection available.

    Also introduced, Logic express, Distributed Audio Processing and Channel Strip Settings. Now Logic Pro was able to be something that was noteworthy.

    Then came the complete redesign of the entire Apple hardware line because of a switch to Intel processors that was necessary because of a failure of the IBM chips to keep pace and stay as cool as the chips from Intel. This took place in just over ONE YEAR. I do not think most people realize how much work this must have been. You do not just drop a new CPU on the mother board and say that’s it. This again must have pushed back the work on bug fixes. Next came the universal binary version of Logic for the Intel’s. More decisions, completely ignore new users or another delay for established users. More delays. Then came the work on the fix for the Quad to make use of all the CPU’s. More delays.All of these seem like prudent business decisions given the circumstances.







    This is assuming that they would want to start from scratch. I think the UI could use some tweaks and bug fixes but not a completely new UI. Like you said it would not make sense. I hear so many people say I wish it was more like Pro Tools. Well it is not Pro Tools and for that I am glad.If someone wants that then they should just use Pro Tools.

    I do not think Logic is for everybody but there are other products out there.

    Actually it has already happened. It's called Garageband. No offense but if that is what your looking for, your right, dont hold your breath.I dont think Apple is going to put iMovie simplicity into Final Cut Pro either.They are aimed at different types of users.
     
  4. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #4
    yes, but...

    i've sat down, cold, with pro tools, cubase, and digital performer. in each (particularly PT), i could be productive in minutes.

    Logic? holy christ was i lost. after an unreasonably long time of trying things (over an hour), i finally was able to record a signal. next time i booted it up, it wasn't recording that way any more, and i couldn't figure it out. so i'm done with it.

    granted, this was version 5, but i've very little reason to give it another go.

    PT, otoh, was and is dead simple to me.
     
  5. Phillip K thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas Nevada
    #5
    I had this same experience with Cubase a couple of weeks ago. I got the free version with my keyboard and I thought I would give it a shot because I wanted to see how if felt. I did not have a manual to check and It took me over an hour to get a midi file to play with internal instruments. I am not a novice with DAWs and it still took me that long.

    I admit that if I had tried to do this with Logic at the very beggining of working with it I would have been eaqually irritated.I was at least enlightened enough to head to the manual before trying anything. I think Logic is one program where reading the manual is not an option. Once I started reading the manual, the "logic" of the way it works became rapidly evident.So I guess different people find different programs easier to work with. I do not try to convince anyone to use Logic. You either love it or hate it. I am surprised (maybe I should not be) at how many people ask the most basic of questions on the Logic forum when a quick glance at the manual would answer the question. The whole manual is even available as a searchable PDF inside of Logic under the help menu.
     
  6. quigleybc macrumors 68030

    quigleybc

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2005
    Location:
    Beautiful Vancouver British Columbia, Canada
    #6
    Logic always made the most sense to me...

    Now I just use Ableton though.
     
  7. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #7
    i still use vi when i program. i reckon if i'd started w/ Logic instead of Performer (which i reckon means i would have had to bought an Atari instead of a Mac) way back in the mid-80's, i'd be a staunch defender of Logic still now.

    but i wonder if i had never used vi and tried to learn it now, if i'd be all "wtf?"

    i'd like to think not, because vi is the rocking-est code editor ever. :)
     
  8. OldCorpse macrumors 65816

    OldCorpse

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    compost heap
    #8
    @Phillip K

    I agree with a lot of your points wrt. the economics of redesigning the UI and how Apple dealt/had to deal with Logic once they acquired it.

    As to what makes intuitive sense... well, maybe different brains work differently and one DAW is intuitive to one brain but not another. I still rather think it's more to do with what you've been exposed to before. If you started out with learning certain modalities of workflow, well, you'll go with a DAW that shares those modalities - this is across apps, not even necessarily from one DAW to another DAW.

    Where we definitely disagree is in your contention that it's impossible to make a very powerful (pro) app very intuitive at the same time. There are millions of examples. Since you brought up the example of iMovie and FCP, I'll counter with Sony Vegas vs FCP. Sony Vegas is pretty much as powerful as FCP is (even though the may be slightly stronger in different departments). Yet, Sony Vegas is hands down the easier NLE to work and learn. I've used both and it is not just my opinion, but a general agreement. We can spend the next month discussing HIG and design principles and why that is so, but sadly this is not the best forum fo this.

    Anyhow, Ableton Live to me is simpler to learn than Logic (though to be fair, they are different purpose DAWs), and I think that's true for most people. Yet, nobody is going to say that somehow AL is a "toy".

    Regardless - the point is, that I can see very clearly how many workflow schemes in Logic are truly arbitrary. And it shouldn't be so. It's like CLI - sure, you can enter all kinds of unix commands and it gives you a lot of power, but the brutal fact is, that those commands are arbitrary collections of code, like a secret handshake you have to know - and that's directly opposite to how it should be... it should be something that you can intuit, it should be constructed in such a way that the choices guide you in your actions without ever being stuck without a clue, needing a secret and arbitrary piece of code.
     
  9. Phillip K thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas Nevada
    #9
    Your make some good points. I would not say Live is a toy but rather
    a different tool. I dont think you can compare it to logic as it would
    not fair to either app as the are for different aspects of the same industry.
    As for video apps, I was just generalizing. I am not really a video person.
    I also do not fly Cesnas or shuttles.:eek:
    I do think all technology is only as useful as it pertains to each user. Someone with experience using unix is not going to have a problem with the CLI. Someone like my mother is going to look at iMovie and tell me "You've got to be kidding" and would not have a clue. So your orientation and background will decide how intuitive a UI is.
     
  10. imageforce macrumors newbie

    imageforce

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    hamburg, germany
    #10
    GUIs

    I started with Logic 4 on PC when i was 15 and i found it pretty easy to learn...

    when i talked to a beta tester at emagic he said something like: "when you use logic audio you use only 10%-30% of what it can do, if you use it for film scoring you use a whole different section of the programm and still it would be only different 10%-30% of what it is able to do." the 20% i needed for my work went very easy with me.

    in my opinion everyone who cannot record a signal within of 30 minutes inside logic should switch to garageband. when they got bought by apple i switched to cubase. same thing with cubase it took me a not even a month to learn what i needed.

    i always say that you choose one particular program by the looks of it and while the logic interface was all slick, beautiful and logic to me, cubase for example was really ugly 2d style and grey at that time - that gladly changed when they introduced sx i think.

    the only GUI that still looks ugly and confusing is pro tools. pro tools is the only app i ever tried which didn`t explain itself to me and the only app, where i really do not know where to start.

    so i rather wait for a new logic version than to learn pro tools. :p
     
  11. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #11
    that says to me that you've never worked an old-style tape machine and mixing desk. that's the audience for which PT was designed, and that's why it made immediate sense to me.

    for you Logic users -- if you record, say, 5 minutes of audio, how long before you can go in and make edits on the waveform?
     
  12. imageforce macrumors newbie

    imageforce

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    hamburg, germany
    #12
    you`re right

    yeah i forgot that... as i am pretty young still... i never worked with tape machines... so thats maybe why i dont like the PT UI... guess you`re right.

    about the pre recording wave stuff... i don`t know really because i never found a reason or situation to use it. but i think you can set it up in logic. in cubase its definable i think. but as i said i never worked with that...

    best regards,
    tommy
     
  13. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #13
    am i reading you right? you've never recorded audio in Logic, but then you say:
     
  14. imageforce macrumors newbie

    imageforce

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    hamburg, germany
    #14
    nono

    :) i thought you meant this prerecording feature where you can go back before the actual start of your recording... i never used that feature.
     
  15. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #15
    ah, okay.

    what i was asking before: i've seen Logic sessions, with a reasonable number of audio tracks (say, a dozen), that take minutes to draw the waveform after recording a track. granted, this was some years ago, so maybe it's better now. that's what/why i was asking.
     
  16. imageforce macrumors newbie

    imageforce

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    hamburg, germany
    #16
    ahaa :)

    okay now i got it,...

    i fear thats still how it is...

    if i record a whole drumkit it takes like 5 minutes to load the waveforms
    but you can speed it up if you doubleclick inside the loading bar... dunno what happens when one does that but i do...

    is this that much faster in pro tools etc... ?
     
  17. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #17
    yes, there's no delay whatsoever. every single waveform operation -- zoom in, zoom out, scroll, expand view, compress view, etc., is instantaneous. and that's with dozens of tracks.

    btw, i'm talking PTLE here, so this is all CPU-native.
     
  18. Phillip K thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas Nevada
    #18
    I am guessing you do not have a recent Mac. The longest I have waited is about 15 seconds for a 4 minute track. My dual G5 is only 1.8 Ghz so it is not even close to the fastet G5 and not even in the same league as a Intel Mac. I do not loose sleep over this kind of stuff.
     
  19. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #19
    imo, 15 seconds is outrageous. why can PT handle this -- not only now, but on machines that we laugh at today -- but not Logic?

    maybe it's not a big to some people, but when a giant part of what one does when engineering a song is waveform and automation editing, even a quarter second lag is too much.
     
  20. Phillip K thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas Nevada
    #20
    I should have noted that this is when tracking which is what I thought we were talking about. I do not use the faster overview feature that would speed this up considerably because when I am tracking I am not editing.
     
  21. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #21
    yeah, we were talking about tracking. i guess i got carried away :)
     
  22. imageforce macrumors newbie

    imageforce

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Location:
    hamburg, germany
    #22
    maybe

    maybe we`re talking about different things here...

    got an 24" iMac 2,33 ghz and 2 gig ram so i guess it`s not slower than yours.

    but when i record a whole drumkit with for example 16 mics. (just three days ago i recorded a huge drumkit with 22 mics) and the track is about 4-6 minutes long at 24bit 44.khz it`ll take some time for logic to load the waveforms.
     
  23. Phillip K thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Location:
    Las Vegas Nevada
    #23
    Though I have two 1.8 Ghz processors I think your machine might be almost as fast as mine since it does have the core duo. Since the iMacs are "consumer" models the support for the chip is not as extensive as their pro line. For example the front side bus on both of my physical chips are running at 900Mhz. The FSB on that iMac is running at 667Mhz. Things like that might make the difference. Though I would bet your "consumer" machine could do just as much as my "Pro"model if not more. Those chips are amazing.

    That would not surprise me. Recording tracks are a bit slower to render
    and you are throwing quite a bit at the program. That is impressive, I never thought an iMac would handle that.
     
  24. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #24
    this shouldn't really be surprising -- simply chucking bits to a drive is not a CPU-intensive operation. mac II ci's could handle such tasks.
     

Share This Page