Going back to the topic I broached: n-track vs Cubase or n-track vs Sonar. Sorry for that!
I can understand when one talks of Voyetra sequencers for the beginner / amateur musician. Those would be cheap yet good because their engines would not be rated for high performance.
But when it comes to sequencers for serious musicians (I assume n-track like Cubase or Sonar is one such!) I fail to understand the BIG gap in price: $50 vs $500 (or so!).
Please don’t misunderstand because I too am one of those “poor” musicians who cannot afford high end sequencers and that is the good work Flavioli is doing to help people like me.
Are the n-track algorithms of the same quality as the big ones? Will it be able to deliver the same quality of output as the big ones?
The basic question is to stand up to competition in a commercial world where a producer would compare two works of music, one created using n-track studio and other Cubase, given the condition that both have the same level of post production quality of work.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| The basic question is to stand up to competition in a commercial world where a producer would compare two works of music, one created using n-track studio and other Cubase, given the condition that both have the same level of post production quality of work. |
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| “I have endorsements by Logic, Cakewalk, Cubase, Nuendo, and pretty much every other program worth having including the top of the line Pro tools 6.0 and I have to say n-Track is the best for audio recording and mixing. The automation and way editing are truley out standing! Speaking as a Producer/Engineer with 3 Grammys now, 12 Multi Platinum records, and more than 20 gold albums it is the program I recomend most. I am currently producing an Album for Warner Brothers, the sound track for a new season of a prime time show on the WB network (Warners also) an HBO movie feature Presentation, and a one hour special on MTV and I am using n-Track for all of the music sound tracks. I’ve used it for the Music on Jack and Jill, Everyone Loves Raymond, Sabrina the Teenage Witch, and several feature films. It definitley kicks the top of the line Pro Tools software’s butt! I tell everyone here in Hollywwod that it is the best music production software anywhere!” - David E. Banta, mixing engineer & author of the “The Basics of Home Recording” video instructional series - Montrose, CA, USA |
Yep.
D
does he still use ntrack? i think i read somewhere that he now uses protools more…
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| The basic question is to stand up to competition in a commercial world where a producer would compare two works of music, one created using n-track studio and other Cubase, given the condition that both have the same level of post production quality of work. |
This is an oversimplification. The amount of time and effort required to produce the result is also very important, especially for the commercial world. Reliability is also important.
For example, you can’t tell from looking at a professional photograph what kind of camera was used to take it. And a number of professional-quality photos have been taken with cheap camers. But some cameras are clearly better for professional work than others, for reasons that are quite obvious to the pros.
Note that I’m not making a comment about n-Track here. I haven’t used other products enough to make any comparisons. I use n-Track and it’s great except for the number of crashes I get – I would look elsewhere if this were pro work for me. Also, I understand that the MIDI editor in certain other programs have useful features that n-Track doesn’t have. I have a number of suggestions for how n-Track MIDI editor could be improved in fairly simple ways, but overall I’m very satisfied with it’s capabilities.
The difference in cost can be explained in a couple simple ways: business models and basic economics.
First, let’s look at the business models: these other products are built by companies with significant staffing and facilities expenses, plus marketing costs. The market for these products is relatively small, as software products go. It would be difficult for them to sell these products at low prices to a small market and make a profit. Flavio, on the other hand, has incredibly low overhead, being mostly a one-man operation that started humbly and grew steadily (plus he’s a highly productive programmer). Marketing costs are whatever he pays for his server, plus the effort he expends maintaining his website. (Probably some startup costs on the website.) All small potatoes compared to what the big boys spend.
Second: basic economics. A savvy company will price its product for maximum profit. That price obviously has to be higher than the costs, but as you raise the cost, your market gets smaller. The best price point to set is the one where the profit per item times the number of purchasers is maximized.
Plus there are different target markets. The ProTools target market is the pro studio, and a lot of guarantees back up that stance. Thus it’s a many-thousand-dollar proposition, yet a small expense of setting up a major studio. The next echelon is targeted at the smaller studios plus home studios for folks with a reasonable budget. Again, note that the cost of these programs is usually small compared to the cost of instruments that folks in this market are likely to have. Finally, there’s the budget market, for cheap bastards like me and for folks who are willing to make the extra effort to find the best value.
My opinion is that n-Track is in the same league as the several-hundred-dollar programs in terms of ease of use and applicability, but since it’s not marketed it’s not as well known. The price is very low so it’s the best value by far.
OK, I’ll step off the podium now … ;).
I agree with Jeff. 
So do I.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| I use n-Track and it’s great except for the number of crashes I get – I would look elsewhere if this were pro work for me. |
I wish the developer would take good note of this observation.
Even non-pro users like me get very frustrated on occasion. Especially when they see cosmetic enhancements and questionable features added all the time, while the general instabilty remains…
I agree with hansje.
Stable, stable, stable.
The one thing I’ve really liked most about the Sonar 3 I tried out was the stability. Yeah, some smoothness of operation, envelopes, etc., but I’d attribute that to stability. Wouldn’t I?
However, I think that Flavio is only one guy. Imagine trying to cook breakfast for 500 people, all of whom are standing around outside… 
About learjeff’s economic model - we should also remember that all of the big names sell through retailers, not only on line, in boxes with CDs. So there are packaging and distribution costs, plus retailers margin.
And I have to agree with the crash issue. I largely tolerate the occassional crash because I know Fasoft is a small-scale friendly operation that I want to support, and the cost of my 3.3 version was very reasonable. But I won’t upgrade until I am confident that 4.X is really rock steady.
TB
The problem with crashes has to do with the near impossibility of testing a program like this in all situations, without a huge battery of testers hammering on it all the time. Well, Flavio has us – but for him to take advantage of it, we have to be able to help him recreate the crash. I’m sure that robustness is a very important thing to Flavio, but unfortunately it’s a terribly difficult problem.
As much as I love working with n-Tracks, one must lower their expectations of relibility when using this program, and adapt their workflow habits to compensate. If it were possible to wear out the paint on an icon, the “save” button would have been bare long ago…
I hit “save” nearly every time I make even the smallest change, that way when n-Track crashes, I just sigh and re-load the program.
Also, we should remember the target platform. Windows PC’s. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure why guys swear by their Mac’s and ProTools, Digital Performer, Apple Logic et al… There are only so many permutations of Mac’s. In the PC world there are gazillions. The hardware driver thing is much simpler to troubleshoot/test and software guys have an easier time of it in the Mac world. The place where Apple got in trouble (but only a little) was the big switch to OSX. From what I understand those issues have settled a lot.
You can liken Flavios task to designing accessories for sports cars. If he only had to design for the Corvette it would be easy. Designing the accessories to to work with Corvettes, Mustangs, Vipers, Nissan Z’s, Mazda RX’s, Ferrari’s etc… would complicate the task enormously depending on whether the item was a stick on the dash Hula girl bobble or a piece of aerodynamic enhancing body work. Now, considering Flavio does not have an army of paid software testers on staff like Digidesign, MOTU, Cakewalk, Steinberg etc I consider it AMAZING that n-Track is as good as it is.
Like Learjeff said, WE are the testers. Don’t just cuss and stomp when some weird thing happens while using n-Track. Take a few minutes to see if it is reproducible then REPORT it to the Flav-meister with all the details you can provide. Sure it’s a PITA when you really just wanna lay down some tracks but you’ll be helping yourself and the entire n community. Now consider how you would feel if you had plopped down $600 for Cubase SX and had these vexing problems and had to wade through hours of on-hold tech support and in the end STILL did not have a problem fix…
$600 dollar buggy software versus $79 dollar buggy software… I’ll take the $79 one!
Oh and I’m not saying either n-Track or Brand X is more buggy than the other… ALL software is buggy! 
D
EDIT: Sheesh! What a long diatribe. Sorry…
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote |
| You can liken Flavios task to designing accessories for sports cars. If he only had to design for the Corvette it would be easy. Designing the accessories to to work with Corvettes, Mustangs, Vipers, Nissan Z’s, Mazda RX’s, Ferrari’s etc… |
It’s even worse than that on the PC. A lot of time you design for a CAR and there’s no way to know what’s under the hood of that CAR, so you much account for anything that might be there, and even worse must account for whatever is under there that doesn’t run right…and it’s even worse than that…you mist account for the road it’s running on and other CARS on the road at the same time that are driving as blind as you are and may well blindside you at any minute. Yes…the app only works with a CAR.
phoo - Devils advocate. And a D@#N good one too!
Like I said, “AMAZING…” Flav is da’ mayun IMO.
D
Sure, Flav built a great car.
But when you get in and turn ignition on, the stereo howls on 10, the airco blasts, the navigator shouts at you, all lights are flashing and the horn is blowing.
No wonder you hit a tree in the first bend…
OK, that was a bit over the top 
, but what I want to say is: I want the car to drive, or, to return to multitracking, I need the functionality and reliability, not the flashy accessories.
But that’s just what I think, of course…
| Quote (hansje @ Jan. 09 2006,13:59) |
| Sure, Flav built a great car. But when you get in and turn ignition on, the stereo howls on 10, the airco blasts, the navigator shouts at you, all lights are flashing and the horn is blowing. No wonder you hit a tree in the first bend..... OK, that was a bit over the top , but what I want to say is: I want the car to drive, or, to return to multitracking, I need the functionality and reliability, not the flashy accessories.But that's just what I think, of course... |
Hope I don't take it too far down a side road, but I do hear quite a bit of that type of remark... attention on the 'perky' stuff, not enough on the engine.
This is an issue to be addressed just as any other by the testers: Us. That's part of the deal. There's only one guy- Flavio. People are quirky as a rule, and maybe Flavio's quirk is that he has a thing for certain details? If so, we're going to have to maybe 'lean into it' a little bit about the stability issues- in a GOOD way! Because you have to respect a guy who can do breakfast for 500, even if your eggs aren't quite just the way you like 'em.
I also get the idea from some of these posts that it's on the table.
You have to be willing to tweak and test your system to get the most out of anybodies software. For example, n-Track had this nasty habit of making a “zipper” noise during playback if I dragged the mixer or did something to cause a screen redraw. Today, on a whim or hunch or whatever you wanna call it, I moved the graphics accelerator bar down a notch on my video cards control panel. “Ziiip” GONE! As has been pointed out, there are soooo many variables out there in PC world… it’s gotta be tough to figure them all. For $79 bucks and what you get with n-Track, I’ll be a Beta tester… On the other hand the machine at church is still on Build 1846. It tracks 24 channels every service without a hiccup. It ain’t broke so I ain’t fixing it!
D
| Quote (Sloom @ Jan. 09 2006,17:32) |
| ...Because you have to respect a guy who can do breakfast for 500, even if your eggs aren't quite just the way you like 'em. I also get the idea from some of these posts that it's on the table. |
I didn't mean breakfast, by the way. I meant the stability thing in general.
I'll add that I've picked up more usable information more quickly by hanging out on the n-Track forum than anywhere else. Add that to the Bargain Tally.
<!–QuoteBegin>
| Quote | ||
I didn’t mean breakfast, by the way. I meant the stability thing in general. |
That’s right.
But it seems that, every time it is put on the table, a whole army of n-Trackeers rises to wipe it under the carpet again (the stability issue; not the eggs !
).I don’t really understand why.
Many are still using v3.3 (>2 years old!) for just this reason.
Don’t get me wrong. I like the program.
I’ve used it since v2.x and I’ve been a proud licencee since 2001.
It’s just that lately I feel that too many of the new features and cosmetic enhancements don’t really add anything for me, whereas addressing the instability issues would really help me.
So please leave this opinion on the table. There is room for 500 of them, according to Sloom…
Here’s a real question:
What exactly is the “Audio Engine”, how/at what level/ is it addressed, and how is it connected to the stability of a program?
Why is this different from things like visual interface, or the functions of particular windows?
Is this another thread?
I don’t think it’s really a technical term. IMHO, the biggest single problem area is soundcard interface code. As anyone who’s implemented to “standard” interfaces knows, documentation never tells everything that needs to be known, and lots of different (and sometimes mutually exclusive) interpretations are possible. So, writing code to interface to a large variety of devices always includes a lot of folklore and learning curve and adjusting to quirks. Furthermore there’s the issue that a number of DLLs can get replaced when you install some software, and that new DLL might not behave quite the way it did before. It’s a nightmare, frankly!
FYI, every time I’ve reported a bug in a professional way, meaning, giving enough info for Flavio to either recreate the bug or else infer the problem source (which sometimes takes a fair amount of work on my part to narrow it down sufficiently), he’s fixed it within a couple of days.
The bigger problem is the set of unreproducible crashes. I don’t bother sending bug reports when I can’t indicate rather specifically what leads to the problem. To make matters worse (for me), the computer I use runs a version of Windows that’s been modified by my employer. So I never know when it might be their fault and focus on problems that leave clear fingerprints.