Logic 8 ? *merged*

[Macaroni]

Here's another way to look at it...

Almost everything Apple has going now is brilliant and at the forefront... OSX, iPod, iPhone, Apple TV, Final Cut Studio, Intel quad Macs, MacBook Pro, etc, etc, etc.

So are we to believe that they are complete morons when it comes to Logic & audio apps? They don't want to be the best out there, like with all their other apps & products? The Logic team is just farting around in a vacuum, not listening to anyone, or caring about what anyone says or complains about.

They've done everything they can to unseat Avid as the big editing program with Final Cut, and they don't have their sights set on the same thing re ProTools, etc?

OSX was specifically designed with Core Audio at the kernal - for what? A better Garage Band app? To say that Logic is just a glorified Garage Band is just plain stupid and moronic - sour grapes of a sort.

It makes no sense that they are letting things slip with Logic and have no vision for the future, especially with the new Intel dual quads on the horizon, along with the most mature version of OSX. That is not like Apple in any way, shape or form.

Come on guys. Have faith. Or not. I do, which is all that matters to me. The less they say, and the longer they take, tells me it's going to be something big, which is exactly Apple's style.

I'm lucky that Logic has no impediments to my production work, so I'm not suffering like others, with whom I sympathize.

[bof]

It's now looking like a June launch (WWDC) and an almost total rewrite of the code. Given the quality of Apple's other 'Pro' apps, I can only imagine this is good news.

[MattiMattMatt]

I figured March and Musikmesse would be the next trade show during which Apple might potentially unleash Logic 8. But I think Macaroni's point above is probably right, that they are timing its release to coincide with the next version of the operating system on which is will likely rely for new features.

So the AppleOptimist would be looking at a Leopard + Logic + 8-core Mac bitchslap on Digi come summer.

[postfader]

Originally Posted by dkatz42

You're confusing 64 bit memory addressing and 64 bit math; they're entirely separate issues with entirely different implications. Modern CPUs will do 64 bit math, and it doesn't take an o/s upgrade to make use of (but it does raise backward compatibility issues for older CPUs.)

This is the domain of 64 bit math. Actually, since this is floating point, the dynamic range goes from a theoretical 1500+ dB to a theoretical 12000+ dB. But the point is not the dynamic range, it's the precision; 64 bit math (which has 53 bits of precision) essentially eliminates roundoff error (because it happens in the very low-order bits that disappear when the results are turned back into 24 bit fixed point.) Whether or not this is audible or important is a matter of taste and marketing.
This is the domain of 64 bit addressing, something different altogether.

Thank you dkatz for pointing out the above. I would hope that a 64 bit'ized version of a DAW program (like Logic) would include not only 64 bit addressing, but IEEE-754 64 bit floating point math for plugins and the entire mix or audio engine - esepcially for digital filters/EQ plugins that benefit from this level of precision.

My understanding is the main reason we have some vendors doing 48 bit (fixed) and 56 bit (fixed) math today, e.g., TDM, is that the literature has already shown that compared to these fixed point schemes, 32 bit floating path precision is not as precise or accurate enough for some digital filter forms. Upgrading to 64 bit floating point however, should be an improvement over these fixed point schemes (and contribute to their demise), and I'd think would make a noticeable dent in improving the "mix in the box" sound.

But the backwards compatibility is not so easy; the way I think Sonar does this is they give you 2 separate copies/binaries of the program (you run one for 32 bit float precision, and the other for 64 bit float precision end to end). This is beacsue the code actually has to be compiled/built differently for 32 bit and 64 bit use end to end.

At the recent seminars Apple is giving to developers on Leopard - they are talking about how to build 64 bit'ized code. But as I said in my last post, Apple's own audio unit (AU) framework in Leopard does not look to be updated to directly support 64 bit floating point data. Meanwhile, Steinberg's VST 2.4 specification already supports 64 bit floating point data.

So by adding the AU plugin format, and no longer supporting the VST spec, Apple may have actually created more work for themselves to move to 64 bit floating point math for plugins and the mix engine. I don't exepct to see vendors like Waves supporting 64 bit floating point precision math until Apple's AU framework does. (And it was painful for 3rd party plug-in vendors to get the first rev of AU plugins working).

I (also) generally like Apple products, and still like/use Logic Pro (going way back to the first Emagic releases). But expereince/working in software development has made me much less optimistic then the other people on this list about the future of Logic.

More then a year without a major update other then point releases is not a good sign for any software product. There are hundreds of bugs posted against Logic; they will never all be fixed (some of them probably can't be). And in big companies, it's usually not the technical/saavy developers who get to pick what bugs get fixed based upon technical goodness, or what they would like to see fixed (and I think Emagic did allow more of this). Management decides "what's important" to fix based upon what's needed to sell the product, and make money from it. Given that I've heard Apple reps say that "ProTools" audience is a different market then what Logic is aiming for, I'm not holding my breath to see when Apple is going to upgrade or fix long standing bugs to make Logic a better audio/plugin host program for high res/pro audio. (But yes, I will buy Logic 8 when it comes out, and if they fix my bugs, I will post about it and do a dance of joy).

Avid bought Digidesign (and at that point ProPtools was not even sample accurate in some places); Apple bought Emagic (still not sample accurate in the arrange window?); Steinberg bought Yamaha. What are the remaning "indepedent" DAW manufacturers who are not owned by big parent companies - who can more directly control their own development priorities? Is it just Cakewalk, MOTU, and Bias-Inc. now (in the U.S.)?

[postfader]

Originally Posted by postfader

T.

Avid bought Digidesign (and at that point ProPtools was not even sample accurate in some places); Apple bought Emagic (still not sample accurate in the arrange window?); Steinberg bought Yamaha. ?

Oops - I meant to say Yamaha bought Steinberg.

[steff3]

Originally Posted by Macaroni

Come on guys. Have faith. Or not. I do, which is all that matters to me. The less they say, and the longer they take, tells me it's going to be something big, which is exactly Apple's style.

I'm lucky that Logic has no impediments to my production work, so I'm not suffering like others, with whom I sympathize.

Well, at least what we all can see:
a) there are ways too many little things that do not get address - eg notes are cut off when triggering UltraBeat with Logic Seq
b) UltraBeat is the best example for a buggy implementation of a new feature - look at sample handling - if that is ease of use what Apple wants to stay for - well, I may have gotten something wrong .....
c) we have to pay for minor updates and bug fixes and are told it is ok, because we get another 2GB of GarageBand stuff
d) exs seemed just be got dropped - there are stupid limitation for zones per instruments, a really "Apple GUI-guideline conform" editor (and it was enhanced und the Apple Logo - and they did not get it right!) etc.
e) OSX is an Operation systems which implies a limit of 12 000 open files - no matter how much memory you have - so it is obviously tailored for Image stuff and not for huge sample libs with millions of single samples .... this is since years now!
f) concerning surround (plugins) Apple is the brake that Steinberg was over years for Side chaining in plugins ....

... one could go on .....

I can export and import mp3 but what about 32bit float ????

The announcement of sample accurate selection in Arrange View (or how they call it) with version 7 could be easily seen as a joke or provocation. pathetic ....

Logic has one major advantage - Steinberg is just too crappy to take advantage of the obvious situation .....

best

[Roger Starr]

Originally Posted by steff3

Logic has one major advantage - Steinberg is just too crappy to take advantage of the obvious situation .....

best

Hmmm, I wouldn't say Nuendo or Cubase is crappy...

Roger

[steff3]

Originally Posted by Roger Starr

Hmmm, I wouldn't say Nuendo or Cubase is crappy...

Roger

Me, did say something about Steinberg, not Cubase or Nuendo ......

But all the CPU spikes of Cubase on Mac, etc. - really slow GUI compared to other stuff, long loading times, etc. - this is on Mac, but heard the same things from PC users compared to Samplitude - packed with Steinberg, does not really make it a winner IMO .....

best

[dkatz42]

Originally Posted by postfader

And in big companies, it's usually not the technical/saavy developers who get to pick what bugs get fixed based upon technical goodness, or what they would like to see fixed (and I think Emagic did allow more of this). Management decides "what's important" to fix based upon what's needed to sell the product, and make money from it.

I can't speak for Apple, but having worked as a software developer for a couple of medium-to-large companies for more years than I'm willing to admit, in my experience there is not a lot of distance between "technical goodness" and "make money" unless the company has its head rectally inserted, in which case they will ultimately go out of business.

Prioritization of bug fixes is a complex and subjective matter, trying to factor in how many folks are affected by the bug, how hard the bug is to fix (if crappy code requires a rewrite, it may be deferred for a planned rewrite, for example), who's complaining, how many developers are available, and what the developer feels like doing.

Ultimately, people complain because the bugs that are important to *them* aren't fixed quickly enough, but that's the luck of the draw.

Frankly, I'm not sure what a bug fix that would "make money" but is not technically important would look like. The software is the product, and if it's broken enough so that people can't use it, nobody will buy it and it won't make money.

I'm not being an apologist to Apple here (I'm used to release cycles on the order of a couple of months myself, and a lot more transparency) but I don't think it's as screwed up as you imply.

[postfader]

Originally Posted by dkatz42

Frankly, I'm not sure what a bug fix that would "make money" but is not technically important would look like. The software is the product, and if it's broken enough so that people can't use it, nobody will buy it and it won't make money.

I'm not being an apologist to Apple here (I'm used to release cycles on the order of a couple of months myself, and a lot more transparency) but I don't think it's as screwed up as you imply.

In the case of say the bug for fixing sample rate conversion, I was essentially told by an Apple Logic manager/engineer that it's just not a high priority/serverity for Apple to update/fix/replace the old code in core audio to do accurate SRC. In contrast, having an accurate sample rate conversion algorithm was a high priority for an organization like Bias Inc. (who fixed their SRC in Peak 5). So I see this as a case where Apple priorotizes (the same) bug as very low, and Bias clearly prioritized it as very high.

As far as tranparency goes, while Apple gives you some indication of your bug priority, this does not always correspond to when/if a bug you file will ever get fixed. And you can't see the frequency, or how many (other) people complained about and/or filed the same bug. So if myself and 10 other engineers are complaining about poor SRC, and 1000 other people are complaining that Logic does not work well with Reason, or that viewing audio in the arrange window is not sample accurate, then how is management going to decide what needs to be fixed by when?

Typically, management is going to try and balance frequency (how many times a bug is reported/occurs - as a measure of how many users are affected), with severity/impact (how broken/bad is it really), and then also factor in some input from the marketing department about what features the next release should have to stay current with competitors etc., - before they dole out specific bugs to engineers to fix according to a schedule for the next release(s). But as you say, this weighting process of factors to decide what should get done/fixed (if at all) is anything but transparent.

I submit Apple is not making money from marketing/advancing Logic Pro as the best audio plugin/host program for editing audio, doing sample rate conversion, mixing or mastering high resolution audio, or performing other pro audio tasks (despite the $1000 list price). From everything I've seen at their seminars, and in every point release since Logic 7.0, Apple is marketing Logic to musicians (and not audio engineers) by increasing the number of bundled plugins, adding MIDI/sequencing ehhancements, addressing loop based "composition", etc. The "technical" reps doing the Apple Pro Logic seminars I've talked to clearly don't even comprehend that different DAW programs could do sample rate conversion differenty/better then Logic Pro (let alone that there is other DAW software with more then 32 bit float resolution in the audio engine/mix buss).

So Apple has demonstrated to me (by neglect, and in comparison to other software vendors like Bias Inc.) that, e.g., SRC bugs (which DSP wise is very broken), is not a high priority ("money making") bug compared to everything else they've done with Logic since the release of 7.0. Sadly, all it takes is one mid-level development manager to skew development priorites one way or the other about what bugs get attention and resources (even if the software developers working for that manager would prioritize the bugs differently). This is a far cry from how we were able to directly email technical staff at Emagic in Germany, and get bugs fixed on a more timely basis (without even using a bug tracking system).

[dkatz42]

Originally Posted by postfader

In the case of say the bug for fixing sample rate conversion, I was essentially told by an Apple Logic manager/engineer that it's just not a high priority/serverity for Apple to update/fix/replace the old code in core audio to do accurate SRC. In contrast, having an accurate sample rate conversion algorithm was a high priority for an organization like Bias Inc. (who fixed their SRC in Peak 5). So I see this as a case where Apple priorotizes (the same) bug as very low, and Bias clearly prioritized it as very high.

As far as tranparency goes, while Apple gives you some indication of your bug priority, this does not always correspond to when/if a bug you file will ever get fixed. And you can't see the frequency, or how many (other) people complained about and/or filed the same bug. So if myself and 10 other engineers are complaining about poor SRC, and 1000 other people are complaining that Logic does not work well with Reason, or that viewing audio in the arrange window is not sample accurate, then how is management going to decide what needs to be fixed by when?

Typically, management is going to try and balance frequency (how many times a bug is reported/occurs - as a measure of how many users are affected), with severity/impact (how broken/bad is it really), and then also factor in some input from the marketing department about what features the next release should have to stay current with competitors etc., - before they dole out specific bugs to engineers to fix according to a schedule for the next release(s). But as you say, this weighting process of factors to decide what should get done/fixed (if at all) is anything but transparent.

I submit Apple is not making money from marketing/advancing Logic Pro as the best audio plugin/host program for editing audio, doing sample rate conversion, mixing or mastering high resolution audio, or performing other pro audio tasks (despite the $1000 list price). From everything I've seen at their seminars, and in every point release since Logic 7.0, Apple is marketing Logic to musicians (and not audio engineers) by increasing the number of bundled plugins, adding MIDI/sequencing ehhancements, addressing loop based "composition", etc. The "technical" reps doing the Apple Pro Logic seminars I've talked to clearly don't even comprehend that different DAW programs could do sample rate conversion differenty/better then Logic Pro (let alone that there is other DAW software with more then 32 bit float resolution in the audio engine/mix buss).

So Apple has demonstrated to me (by neglect, and in comparison to other software vendors like Bias Inc.) that, e.g., SRC bugs (which DSP wise is very broken), is not a high priority ("money making") bug compared to everything else they've done with Logic since the release of 7.0. Sadly, all it takes is one mid-level development manager to skew development priorites one way or the other about what bugs get attention and resources (even if the software developers working for that manager would prioritize the bugs differently). This is a far cry from how we were able to directly email technical staff at Emagic in Germany, and get bugs fixed on a more timely basis (without even using a bug tracking system).

I think we're basically in violent agreement here. Cutting to the chase, Apple is not fixing the bugs that you think are important to fix. This is not to say that the stuff getting fixed is not technically important; it just doesn't seem to be important to you (or to me, for that matter.)

The effects of a big company are a mixed bag. Transparency and access to the engineers tends to go away, but a lot more resources can be brought to bear. Logic came from Emagic with tremendous amounts of legacy code that had to be rewritten to bring it into the modern age (OSX, modern window management, etc.) I suspect that if Apple had not bought Emagic, Logic would be much further behind on the curve.

The success of Logic in the high end market boils down to how seriously Apple wants to go after that market. There are mixed messages there; the collaboration with Apogee is a positive, but the seeming lack of fixing certain bugs is not. Apple will never make a lot of money selling Logic to pros, versus the Unwashed Masses, but there is a lot of value in operating in that market to help draw in customers at other tiers. Everybody who dreams about being a pro wants to use the tools the pros use, so it's worth their while to give the pros what they need.

I'm less pessimistic than you about Apple's intentions in this area, but all we can do is wait and see, and vote with our feet if they don't see fit to give us what we need.

[parky]

[QUOTE=So the AppleOptimist would be looking at a Leopard + Logic + 8-core Mac bitchslap on Digi come summer.[/QUOTE]

ay men

[jon2911]

=So the AppleOptimist would be looking at a Leopard + Logic + 8-core Mac bitchslap on Digi come summer.

I think Logic vs. Pro Tools statements like this are a bit misinformed.
Guess which partner had the biggest presence at DigiWorld San Francisco? Apple.
Guess who makes a ton of money for Apple? Digi.

Bottom line, Apple exists to sell computers (and they're really good at it btw), and their priorities regarding Logic seem to reflect that. Based on the quotes on this thread, they've decided that Digi owns the high-end engineer market (which is true), so they're marketing Logic to musicians. Digi helped keep Apple alive in the 90's, so you think they want to "bitchslap" Digi? From everything I've seen, they bought Emagic to use the Logic engine for Garageband. Brilliant move, but Logic Pro has taken a back seat ever since. I don't really know how else to explain the lack of updates and bug fixes. Sorry pro guys...

[steff3]

>>
..... Digi helped keep Apple alive in the 90's,
>>

To me this sounds like pure fantasy - why should that have been so? because their windows versions at that time were too crappy and buggy. Fact is, that they helped Apple to sell some computers in the audio domain - but it was not the case that they actually spread much love for Apple with one share holder being Intel and preparing the take-over of Softimage from Microsoft.

Next I do not think that the audio market is that significant - the whole DTP market is much more important IMO.

[Macaroni]

Digi helped keep Apple alive in the 90's, so you think they want to "bitchslap" Digi?

That makes no logical sense whatsoever. Apple has been bitch slapping Avid - Digi's parent - with Final Cut Pro for years. No love lost there. And FCP has taken a HUGE chunk away from Avid.

From everything I've seen, they bought Emagic to use the Logic engine for Garageband. Brilliant move, but Logic Pro has taken a back seat ever since. I don't really know how else to explain the lack of updates and bug fixes. Sorry pro guys...

That's just ridiculous, and shows how little you really do know, unless you can back this up with solid facts, which is doubtful.

[Roger Starr]

This is all just speculating. With the next serious upgrade of LogicPro we all will know what direction is goes. For sure, if it is not aplying to the demands pro ask and it is more musicians instrument orientated the whole things will be completely clear. Just wait and see what happens the coming half year...

Regards,

Roger

[kaoss]

Originally Posted by arimaka

for recording you can't do it...
for mixing delay comp takes care of it with I/O plug... use it daily with parellel comp (where you could really hear the latency if it was there)...

Your comment had me intrigued so I had to test this.

I use Logic mostly under DAE but today I used it with CoreAudio/MOTU 828 MkII.

I copied an identical drumbeat on two different tracks and then I ran one of them through I/O into a bypassed Portico compressor.

Now the results: Without PDC, there was an audible delay, with PDC engaged - there was comb filtering.

Even with PDC engaged I still had to nudge the 'Portico track' by 122 samples to get acceptable result.
However, I still didn't get 100% phase cancellation when flipping phase on one of the tracks. It was pretty close but I could still hear some very high freq content. I assume it has something to do with MOTU analog circuits.

[Reptil]

Originally Posted by kaoss

Your comment had me intrigued so I had to test this.

I use Logic mostly under DAE but today I used it with CoreAudio/MOTU 828 MkII.

I copied an identical drumbeat on two different tracks and then I ran one of them through I/O into a bypassed Portico compressor.

Now the results: Without PDC, there was an audible delay, with PDC engaged - there was comb filtering.

Even with PDC engaged I still had to nudge the 'Portico track' by 122 samples to get acceptable result.
However, I still didn't get 100% phase cancellation when flipping phase on one of the tracks. It was pretty close but I could still hear some very high freq content. I assume it has something to do with MOTU analog circuits.

yah, I hope they adress PDC, it's poop right now.
and the last week 7.1.1 saw more crashes here than uzbekistan tupolevs.
I like to add another point: Legacy support for control surfaces.
If they drop that, I'll drop them.

[DrDeltaM]

Originally Posted by kaoss

Your comment had me intrigued so I had to test this.

I use Logic mostly under DAE but today I used it with CoreAudio/MOTU 828 MkII.

I copied an identical drumbeat on two different tracks and then I ran one of them through I/O into a bypassed Portico compressor.

Now the results: Without PDC, there was an audible delay, with PDC engaged - there was comb filtering.

Even with PDC engaged I still had to nudge the 'Portico track' by 122 samples to get acceptable result.
However, I still didn't get 100% phase cancellation when flipping phase on one of the tracks. It was pretty close but I could still hear some very high freq content. I assume it has something to do with MOTU analog circuits.

That's because Logic doesn't compensate for convertor latency (and other soundcard latencies like DSP routing matrix etc) as those don't get reported. Only soundcard buffer gets compensated.
To solve this, simply use Expert Sleepers' free Latency Fixer plugin with a correct value (220 samples for a FF800 for example) in combination with an I/O plugin. Some sort of phasing will always be going on tho, as there is no convertor that I know of that has a latency of an exact whole number of samples. So you can be maximally off by 0,5samples. Using higher sample rates make this issue smaller.

[kenn.michael]

Originally Posted by Reptil

and the last week 7.1.1 saw more crashes here than uzbekistan tupolevs.

The newer versions are more stable... 7.2.3 is much more stable than my experience with 7.1.1.

[Reptil]

Originally Posted by kenn.michael

The newer versions are more stable... 7.2.3 is much more stable than my experience with 7.1.1.

hah, at first I thought you had first hand experience of nosediving tupolevs.
I'll get the update (bah! paid update vies) in case mr. jobs decides to do a "and now for something completely different" trick.
thanks.

[Ashermusic]

Originally Posted by DrDeltaM

That's because Logic doesn't compensate for convertor latency (and other soundcard latencies like DSP routing matrix etc) as those don't get reported. Only soundcard buffer gets compensated.
To solve this, simply use Expert Sleepers' free Latency Fixer plugin with a correct value (220 samples for a FF800 for example) in combination with an I/O plugin. Some sort of phasing will always be going on tho, as there is no convertor that I know of that has a latency of an exact whole number of samples. So you can be maximally off by 0,5samples. Using higher sample rates make this issue smaller.

In the Audio Hardware and Drivers panel Logic does have a Recording Delay setting that helps with this issue.

[jon2911]

Originally Posted by steff3

..... Digi helped keep Apple alive in the 90's

To me this sounds like pure fantasy - why should that have been so? because their windows versions at that time were too crappy and buggy.

No, because Windows versions didn't exist. Digi and Apple partnered exclusively for quite a while, Windows PT came along after the Avid purchase. That might explain why the Apple/Avid relationship isn't as good as Apple/Digi.

I think that the Mac/PT combo in music became the almost universal standard because of that partnership, and Apple still makes a TON of money off of PT users. Logic is great, but the Apple rep's comment at NAMM, about Logic not being in competition with Pro Tools, makes sense. Apple and Digi don't hate each other, and any suggestion that Apple's trying to stamp out Pro Tools is wishful thinking IMO. We'll just have to see how it plays out, but those waiting for a PT-killer from Apple might be waiting for a long, long time.

Of course this is all speculation, but there seems to be a lot of fear here at GS that Apple could be going more consumer (Garageband) and musician (Logic) and leaving the high-end stuff to Pro Tools. I think that's exactly what they're doing, and it would be a smart move (like most of what they're doing right now).

[kaoss]

Originally Posted by DrDeltaM

That's because Logic doesn't compensate for convertor latency (and other soundcard latencies like DSP routing matrix etc) as those don't get reported. Only soundcard buffer gets compensated.
To solve this, simply use Expert Sleepers' free Latency Fixer plugin with a correct value (220 samples for a FF800 for example) in combination with an I/O plugin. Some sort of phasing will always be going on tho, as there is no convertor that I know of that has a latency of an exact whole number of samples. So you can be maximally off by 0,5samples. Using higher sample rates make this issue smaller.

Re: soundcard/convertor latencies: Exactly, this is what I was basically suggesting on a previous page as a response to someone else's post.
I actually did use Expert Sleepers plugin in my test and it worked very well.
I think it's still probably the best solution for native Logic setups w/outboard.
I normally don't use CoreAudio but I was curious about the whole issue and that's why I did the test.

[MattiMattMatt]

Originally Posted by jon2911

Of course this is all speculation, but there seems to be a lot of fear here at GS that Apple could be going more consumer (Garageband) and musician (Logic) and leaving the high-end stuff to Pro Tools. I think that's exactly what they're doing, and it would be a smart move (like most of what they're doing right now).

Isn't the distinction between engineer and musician a false dichotomy from the software developer's point of view? More and more musicians and engineers access the same tools (whether they like it or not).

Just because Logic might be more musician-oriented, and PT might be more engineer-oriented, doesn't mean musicians don't also want the same high level audio tools in ProTools. Unless the Logic development team is purposely hobbling audio in Logic so it doesn't directly compete with ProTools (and why would they do that?) wouldn't they naturally continue to develop features that more closely compete? In other words, I don't see how Apple can continue to develop Logic without on some level thinking of it as a ProTools-killer.

[MattiMattMatt]

Originally Posted by Roger Starr

This is all just speculating. With the next serious upgrade of LogicPro we all will know what direction is goes.

I agree. Until now, much of what Apple has done has to do with packaging, stopgaps, compatibility, and a few Frankensteinien bells and whistles. But Apple has yet to really do their thing and turn Logic into an Apple-like application like they did with FinalCut. With the next version it should be clear if Logic is going to limp or sprint, if Apple is going to continue to patch on a little of this and a little of that, or if they're genuinely developing it as an Apple-quality pro application for the next 750-1000 or so years.

I understand that Apple is holding off on their next generation desktop machines until Adobe CS is fully intel-compatible, timing hardware with software. Assuming Apple developers are busy recreating Logic in their image, it's likely that L8 would be similarly timed.

[Pr.tiouz]

The more we wait, the better it will be

[Dr Gruv]

zzzzzzzzzzzz

old time notator user from the emagic days

this 'might be' the most talked about release...

can anyone else remember such a wait or build up to an update?

[Macaroni]

Of course this is all speculation, but there seems to be a lot of fear here at GS that Apple could be going more consumer (Garageband) and musician (Logic) and leaving the high-end stuff to Pro Tools. I think that's exactly what they're doing, and it would be a smart move (like most of what they're doing right now).

One thing is certain - Steve Jobs is hard core competitive, and he likes Apple's products to be 'best in show', to kill competitors, and Logic is no exception. They didn't have to buy Logic just to create Garage Band - that's ridiculous nonsense.

It's all about Avid + ProTools vs Final Cut Pro + Logic Pro, and FCP is already giving Avid a serious run for their money. Also, if I'm not mistaken, Logic has more users than any other DAW, so a big upgrade means serious $$$ for Apple.

It's so obvious that they are waiting for the next version of OSX and the dual quad core Intel Macs, both of which are among the biggest upgrades of OS and hardware yet, so it makes perfect, sense to introduce the next generation of Logic when those two items are ready for prime time.

You've got the whole eMagic development team, which has been working full time on 'something'. Since we haven't had any major updates for a while, it means they're working on major items/issues, to blow away the competition, beyond just matching their features/functions. That's Apple's style - mind blowing products.

The new OSX and dual quad cores will certainly match, or possibly exceed the capabilities of a high end ProTools setup, at a fraction of the cost.

[Dr Gruv]

Originally Posted by Macaroni

One thing is certain - Steve Jobs is hard core competitive, and he likes Apple's products to be 'best in show', to kill competitors, and Logic is no exception. They didn't have to buy Logic just to create Garage Band - that's ridiculous nonsense.

It's all about Avid + ProTools vs Final Cut Pro + Logic Pro, and FCP is already giving Avid a serious run for their money. Also, if I'm not mistaken, Logic has more users than any other DAW, so a big upgrade means serious $$$ for Apple.

It's so obvious that they are waiting for the next version of OSX and the dual quad core Intel Macs, both of which are among the biggest upgrades of OS and hardware yet, so it makes perfect, sense to introduce the next generation of Logic when those two items are ready for prime time.

You've got the whole eMagic development team, which has been working full time on 'something'. Since we haven't had any major updates for a while, it means they're working on major items/issues, to blow away the competition, beyond just matching their features/functions. That's Apple's style - mind blowing products.

The new OSX and dual quad cores will certainly match, or possibly exceed the capabilities of a high end ProTools setup, at a fraction of the cost.

so this is the pro tools killer? talked about last year or so?

it would be nice to see and expectations are high

i really feel that now we should see the benefit of emagic being bought out by apple... the benefits of knowing and working with the os core audio and the latest music software - of course garage band will get the update first - just a joke - (but it could happen if ilife '07 is released first)