any one mess with transfuser
hi couple quick questions first any one mess with transfuser if so what parts are accessible to us if any and is there any where i can get protools training or no thanks -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Accessibility pt10.3.8 vs pt11.1
Well, I finally got my pro tools 11.1 authorized with avid, with the help of my Sweetwater sales guy. And with a bit of experimentation, I actually was able to transfer the key onto my iLok with the license manager on Windows. If you use OCR in jaws or NVDA, you can sort of figure out where you are. It’s a bit better with Jaws. If you right click on the key you want to transfer, which will appear if you selectg “all my licenses” from the license menu, you will get a drop down menu. When you select activate, you need to highlight the destination iLOk and then press OK. YOu will get another confirmation and you need to press OK again on that and you’ll see “Processing.” Finally it should say successful. BUt it is not by any definition accessible, I just had enough tenacity to stick with it and I was nervous that I might do something wrong that would deactivate my key or something. So Pace, if you’re monitoring this list, this doesn’t mean you’re off the hook. On the mac it is totally invisible to us. GOrd On Jan 10, 2014, at 2:27 PM, Slau Halatyn slauhala...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Matt, It is a bit odd that none of the parameters are visible in that particular plug-in under 10. I wouldn't have guessed at that result. Well, for now, I suppose one could use the 4-band eQ which appears to be readable. Of course, under version 11.1, the 7-band EQ is completely readable. Go figure… :) Slau On Jan 10, 2014, at 7:13 AM, matt diemert mcdiem...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Slau, In a previous message in this thread, you mentioned that the AAX plugs were some what accessible in 10.3.8. I had an instance last night working on someones rig that was running this build, and I just pulled up the 7 band EQ that is standard kit in Pro Tools. When navigating the plug, voice over stopped at the automation settings button and would not go down any further in to the actual EQ settings. Was I doing something wrong, or, are the AAX plugs hit and miss in the 10.3.8 build. It's not a big deal as I can take everything home when we're done working, but it'd be nice to throw some basic EQ in after tracking something. Thanks. On 1/8/14, Chi Kim chigook...@hotmail.com wrote: Thanks Slau, Glad that the aax is accessible with pt10 to a certain degree. It's time for me to convince school to update to Mavericks along with pt11! Chi On 1/6/2014 1:16 PM, Slau Halatyn wrote: Hi Chi, OK, I've had a chance to review and refresh my memory of the issues of 10 versus 11. Upon review, version 11 really contains all of the improvements. The only substantive improvement that version 10 has is mainly the accessibility of the counters and AAX plug-ins. Regarding the counters, that could quite possibly be because of Mavericks versus Mountain Lion. It's been 8 months since I tried version 11 on Mountain Lion and there were a load of problems, not the least of which was the counter display issue. So, with version 10.3.8, the counters are readable but, whether that's because of Mavericks or not, I can't say for sure as I've been on Mavericks since the bulk of the accessibility work started. regarding plug-ins, the AAX plug-ins are accessible for the most part in version 10 but not in the same way as they are in 11. In a pinch, I was able to use some plug-ins for an emergency after my beta license for 11 ran out. iLok License Manager not yet being accessible, my only choice at the time was to use version 10 for which I had purchased a license back before the License Manager was introduced. So, with those two mentionable improvements but not much else that I can tell at a cursory glance, the focus is really on 11. Hope that helps, Slau On Jan 6, 2014, at 12:37 PM, Chi Kim chigook...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi Slau, Thanks for the explanation. I was just wondering how much accessibility improvement in 11 was included in 10.3.8 as well. Regardless, I'm looking forward to upgrading to 11! Chi On 1/5/2014 12:27 PM, Slau Halatyn wrote: Hi Chi, Yes, there is a difference. The focus on accessibility in the future will be on version 11. There were improvements to 10.3.8 for sure but it was not the primary concentration. From now on, any updates to version 10 will be general maintenance and will not likely include significant improvements to accessibility. Much like bug fixes in other software, it's not expected that the developer will go back to previous versions of the software to fix the problem. The point is that it's fixed in the new version and that's it. In this situation, however, there are still people needing to use version 10 during the transition from 32 to 64 bit and while plug-in developers are pulling up the rear. I was surprised at how much was actually done in 10.3.8 to begin with. BTW, one task that is still only doable in 10 and not 11 is to create a custom nudge value. In 11, a VoiceOver user can only choose from the default values
(OT)FYI: Beyond MP3: New push for high-resolution music
Off topic: Information for you future audio engineers. Beyond MP3: New push for high-resolution music http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2014/01/09/beyond-mp3-new-push-for-high-resolution-music/?intcmp=related -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Clearing solo for all tracks.
Hi everyone, Thanks for the great suggestions to clear solo. I just purchased 2 avid artist mixes, so I hope there is a way to do this from the surface it self. But these are all great suggestions. Thanks again. Jason On Friday, January 10, 2014 4:10:54 PM UTC-4, Slau Halatyn wrote: This discussion is a good illustration of why control surfaces are practically a necessity. Many have dedicated solo clear buttons not to mention the solo buttons themselves which can quickly be turned on or off. Anyway, always good to know multiple ways of getting to the same result. Too bad VoiceOver doesn't support modified clicks yet. I've been suggesting that for some time. Maybe some day but, for now, yes, routing the pointer and clicking a physical mouse or track pad with the modifier is the way to go. Slau On Jan 10, 2014, at 3:04 PM, Poppa Bear heaven...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: I will try that Matt. For safe solo, it would make mixing much easier when I get a high track count of instruments that I want to bus and have to rename each instrument track by track because the client baught that music and it is just labeled with the producers name rather than the instrument for that track. - Original Message - From: matt diemert mcdi...@gmail.comjavascript: To: ptac...@googlegroups.com javascript: Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 3:18 AM Subject: Re: Clearing solo for all tracks. Poppa, As far as I'm able to tell, the only way to solo safe a track is to physically click the solo button in track strip while holding down command. In other words, when I'm on the solo button, I press voiceover command f5 to bring mouse focus to the button, and while holding down command, click on my mouse. In regards to the other question, I typically keep my solo on xhor so that my solo follows what ever track is selected, if I need to sol up ultiple things I make my selection across those tracks first then solo. Hope this helps. On 1/10/14, Poppa Bear heaven...@gmail.com javascript: wrote: I don't want to highjack your post, but I am wondering something about soloing as well, is there a shortcut key command to put tracks on safe solo mode? - Original Message - From: studiojay To: ptac...@googlegroups.com javascript: Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 8:42 PM Subject: Clearing solo for all tracks. Hi everyone, is there a way to clear solos for all tracks in a session? Some times, I may have a track soloed and I can't remember which track it is especially in large sessions and the soloed track may not be playing at the posision in the session I am currently playing. I have to go through each track to find the soloed track. Thanks in advance for any help. Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- Warm Regards: Matt Diemert 330-980-0046 -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+u...@googlegroups.com javascript:. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
trouble saving a a x protools presets
hi i currently own stevenslatedrums they just released a public beta its a a x i installed it but loaded one of the presets all protools said was busy i had a sighted person save a preset again still got busy busy works fine under protools 10 with the r t a s version is it something to do with a a x thanks -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: trouble saving a a x protools presets
Sounds more like its a public beta issue more so than a AAX issue. The very nature that its a Beta means there is quite possibly still some Bugs and its not ready for prime time just yet. On Jan 11, 2014, at 7:24 AM, chad baker baker3...@gmail.com wrote: hi i currently own stevenslatedrums they just released a public beta its a a x i installed it but loaded one of the presets all protools said was busy i had a sighted person save a preset again still got busy busy works fine under protools 10 with the r t a s version is it something to do with a a x thanks -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility
Which means what, in standard English? At 09:50 PM 1/10/2014, you wrote: QT damn shit On 2014-01-10 21:04, Slau Halatyn wrote: I was recently put in touch with the president and vice-president at PACE anti-Piracy, the makers of the iLok key and the iLok License Manager software. Since i made it clear that I wished to share their response with this community, I'm pasting it below. In fact, I'm including my original message as well. I'd normally not send as lengthy an email to a developer but, under the circumstances and, given it's impact, I wanted to give it a little more weight. You'll notice that the vice-president has responded and they're clearly aware of the issue and have indicated their intention to resolve the problem. You'll notice that in my response I tried to suggest that the project would surely not take as much work as Mr. Kirk has estimated but, even if their estimate turns out to be correct, the fact that they're still willing to fix it is good news. Still, I think they'll ultimately find that it won't be as complicated as it might appear. I do also suspect that the scope of the work as described by Mr. Kirk also includes the necessary work it'll take to migrate to a newer development platform. That was something that Avid experienced as well and is one of the reasons it took so long to get to the point where Avid could begin work on Pro Tools accessibility. Anyway, you'll find the initial message and subsequent responses below. Best, Slau On Jan 6, 2014, at 8:49 AM, Slau Halatyn mailto:s...@besharpstudios.coms...@besharpstudios.com wrote: Dear Mr. Cronce, My name is Slau Halatyn and I've been an iLok user since 2002 when I made the switch from an analog multitrack to Pro Tools HD. I'm a blind studio owner and trained audio engineer in New York City. When I witnessed the iLok system at work, I was impressed and, at the same time, relieved to not have to deal with challenge/response and registration code nightmares. Everything went quite swimmingly until the iLok License Manager. Please allow me to digress just a bit… I've been working with many people at avid including Rich Holmes and ed Gray among others regarding the accessibility of Pro Tools. Actually, that work started years before when David Gibbons was still at Digidesign. There were various obstacles to overcome while the company transitioned through several technologies but, with the new release of Pro Tools 11.1, we've seen incredible strides in improved accessibility for blind users. With this comes many new blind users ranging from students all the way to professional audio engineers and studio owners. For a time, while Pro Tools was improving in accessibility from version 8 through 10, the use of PACE's http://ilok.com/iLok.com site was very straight-forward and quite accessible since it was based on html which, if standards were followed, was very easy to use. Unfortunately for blind users, the introduction of the new iLok License Manager saw this accessibility completely wiped out. The application is completely unusable for blind users trying to access the program's features with the built-in screen reader in OS X known as VoiceOver. there is no work-around for the problem and the only way one can deal with licenses is to have a sighted individual perform the tasks instead. With the advent of new Pro Tools accessibility and upgrading to new HDX systems and plug-ins, this affects people like me on a daily basis. I know that others in our community have written for support and have been told that PACE is aware of the issue and I would imagine that it has possibly been brought to your attention. I'm writing to you to ask that this issue be addressed and resolved as soon as your resources allow. To blind users of iLoks, not having access to the iLok License Manager is the equivalent of sighted users suddenly not having access to their licenses and I'm sure you're no stranger to user complaints when things go wrong. The recent problems that PACE experienced was, I'm sure, stressful and you're probably relieved to have that behind you. Stress, however, is what blind users are experiencing every time a demo license or upgrade comes up. The disappointment at the current state of iLok License Manager accessibility is evident every time a new blind user learns of the issue. I offer you a fairly simple solution: Apple has some basic programming guidelines for making applications accessible with VoiceOver. Largely, it's a matter of simply defining UI elements. If UI elements are undefined or unlabeled, the user sees nothing in the application apart from the menu bar. If a button is defined as a button, the user sees the button. If that button is unlabeled, well, that's not so great. However, if it's defined as a button and also labeled, the user can perform the default action, interact in whichever way is appropriate and
Re: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility
Did someone say ILM stands for iLok manager? I've never seen this written anywhere! Unless you have proof of that, please don't go writing Pace. LOL At 10:24 PM 1/10/2014, you wrote: wo wo wo! Wait a minute here! ILM is Ilok Manager? that's the same scheme used by JAWS! JAWS made it accessible! Granted, they did so without the physical ILok dongle, and yeah, they only give 5 activations, but! that isn't the point. the point is, if ILok are the ones who made the ILM scheme, and we got it working reliably with JFW, who's to say it would be difficult getting it working elseware for things that need it. Frankly, I see this as just lame excuse to further delay accessible development. I'm saying, I see their responses as such. Call me a jack ass for saying it, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it. Chris. - Original Message - From: Scott Chesworth scottcheswo...@gmail.com To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 4:09 PM Subject: Re: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility Oh, depending on what version of QT they've used, there hands really could be tied quite tight. That said, I'm pretty sure the iZotope chaps managed to get some semblance of accessibility going pre QT5, so it can be done. Good to know it's on the radar anyway. Thanks for keeping us informed. Scott On 1/10/14, Chris Smart csma...@cogeco.ca wrote: Perhaps also mention that this affects Windows users as well, and that NVDA is a free screenreader they can use in their testing on the Windows side. At 03:16 PM 1/10/2014, you wrote: Thank you Slau, I shared this with the mag as well because so many of the users over there struggle with the same issue. - Original Message - From: mailto:slauhala...@gmail.comSlau Halatyn To: mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.comptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 11:04 AM Subject: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility I was recently put in touch with the president and vice-president at PACE anti-Piracy, the makers of the iLok key and the iLok License Manager software. Since i made it clear that I wished to share their response with this community, I'm pasting it below. In fact, I'm including my original message as well. I'd normally not send as lengthy an email to a developer but, under the circumstances and, given it's impact, I wanted to give it a little more weight. You'll notice that the vice-president has responded and they're clearly aware of the issue and have indicated their intention to resolve the problem. You'll notice that in my response I tried to suggest that the project would surely not take as much work as Mr. Kirk has estimated but, even if their estimate turns out to be correct, the fact that they're still willing to fix it is good news. Still, I think they'll ultimately find that it won't be as complicated as it might appear. I do also suspect that the scope of the work as described by Mr. Kirk also includes the necessary work it'll take to migrate to a newer development platform. That was something that Avid experienced as well and is one of the reasons it took so long to get to the point where Avid could begin work on Pro Tools accessibility. Anyway, you'll find the initial message and subsequent responses below. Best, Slau On Jan 6, 2014, at 8:49 AM, Slau Halatyn mailto:s...@besharpstudios.coms...@besharpstudios.com wrote: Dear Mr. Cronce, My name is Slau Halatyn and I've been an iLok user since 2002 when I made the switch from an analog multitrack to Pro Tools HD. I'm a blind studio owner and trained audio engineer in New York City. When I witnessed the iLok system at work, I was impressed and, at the same time, relieved to not have to deal with challenge/response and registration code nightmares. Everything went quite swimmingly until the iLok License Manager. Please allow me to digress just a bit… I've been working with many people at avid including Rich Holmes and ed Gray among others regarding the accessibility of Pro Tools. Actually, that work started years before when David Gibbons was still at Digidesign. There were various obstacles to overcome while the company transitioned through several technologies but, with the new release of Pro Tools 11.1, we've seen incredible strides in improved accessibility for blind users. With this comes many new blind users ranging from students all the way to professional audio engineers and studio owners. For a time, while Pro Tools was improving in accessibility from version 8 through 10, the use of PACE's http://ilok.com/iLok.com site was very straight-forward and quite accessible since it was based on html which, if standards were followed, was very easy to use. Unfortunately for blind users, the introduction of the new iLok License Manager saw this accessibility completely wiped out. The application is completely unusable for blind users trying to access the program's features
Re: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility
Thank you for clearing that up! At 11:33 PM 1/10/2014, you wrote: Chris, ILM and iLok License Manager are not the same thing. It's simply a coincidence that the first letters for Pace's software product work out to ILM but that's not the official name.. Slau On Jan 10, 2014, at 10:24 PM, Christopher gilland mailto:clgillan...@gmail.comclgillan...@gmail.com wrote: wo wo wo! Wait a minute here! ILM is Ilok Manager? that's the same scheme used by JAWS! JAWS made it accessible! Granted, they did so without the physical ILok dongle, and yeah, they only give 5 activations, but! that isn't the point. the point is, if ILok are the ones who made the ILM scheme, and we got it working reliably with JFW, who's to say it would be difficult getting it working elseware for things that need it. Frankly, I see this as just lame excuse to further delay accessible development. I'm saying, I see their responses as such. Call me a jack ass for saying it, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it. Chris. - Original Message - From: Scott Chesworth mailto:scottcheswo...@gmail.comscottcheswo...@gmail.com To: mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.comptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 4:09 PM Subject: Re: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility Oh, depending on what version of QT they've used, there hands really could be tied quite tight. That said, I'm pretty sure the iZotope chaps managed to get some semblance of accessibility going pre QT5, so it can be done. Good to know it's on the radar anyway. Thanks for keeping us informed. Scott On 1/10/14, Chris Smart mailto:csma...@cogeco.cacsma...@cogeco.ca wrote: Perhaps also mention that this affects Windows users as well, and that NVDA is a free screenreader they can use in their testing on the Windows side. At 03:16 PM 1/10/2014, you wrote: Thank you Slau, I shared this with the mag as well because so many of the users over there struggle with the same issue. - Original Message - From: mailto:slauhala...@gmail.commailto:slauhala...@gmail.comSlau Halatyn To: mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.commailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.commailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.comptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 11:04 AM Subject: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility I was recently put in touch with the president and vice-president at PACE anti-Piracy, the makers of the iLok key and the iLok License Manager software. Since i made it clear that I wished to share their response with this community, I'm pasting it below. In fact, I'm including my original message as well. I'd normally not send as lengthy an email to a developer but, under the circumstances and, given it's impact, I wanted to give it a little more weight. You'll notice that the vice-president has responded and they're clearly aware of the issue and have indicated their intention to resolve the problem. You'll notice that in my response I tried to suggest that the project would surely not take as much work as Mr. Kirk has estimated but, even if their estimate turns out to be correct, the fact that they're still willing to fix it is good news. Still, I think they'll ultimately find that it won't be as complicated as it might appear. I do also suspect that the scope of the work as described by Mr. Kirk also includes the necessary work it'll take to migrate to a newer development platform. That was something that Avid experienced as well and is one of the reasons it took so long to get to the point where Avid could begin work on Pro Tools accessibility. Anyway, you'll find the initial message and subsequent responses below. Best, Slau On Jan 6, 2014, at 8:49 AM, Slau Halatyn mailto:s...@besharpstudios.commailto:s...@besharpstudios.commailto:s...@besharpstudios.coms...@besharpstudios.com wrote: Dear Mr. Cronce, My name is Slau Halatyn and I've been an iLok user since 2002 when I made the switch from an analog multitrack to Pro Tools HD. I'm a blind studio owner and trained audio engineer in New York City. When I witnessed the iLok system at work, I was impressed and, at the same time, relieved to not have to deal with challenge/response and registration code nightmares. Everything went quite swimmingly until the iLok License Manager. Please allow me to digress just a bit… I've been working with many people at avid including Rich Holmes and ed Gray among others regarding the accessibility of Pro Tools. Actually, that work started years before when David Gibbons was still at Digidesign. There were various obstacles to overcome while the company transitioned through several technologies but, with the new release of Pro Tools 11.1, we've seen incredible strides in improved accessibility for blind users. With this comes many new blind users ranging from students all the way to professional audio engineers and studio owners. For a time, while Pro Tools was improving in
Re: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility
This is Correct, Freedom Scientifics authorization scheme is based on sentinel systems, which is a service that places a key locally on the computers hard drive, and in many cases when that crashes and burns as it tends to do, you need additional authorization. Same scheme that iTunes uses for the most part. iLok as it stands is a great solution, recently I had to completely reinstall the operating system and PT on my mac, and knowing that at least my license was safe and sound on my iLok was actually a comfort! On 1/11/14, Chris Smart csma...@cogeco.ca wrote: Thank you for clearing that up! At 11:33 PM 1/10/2014, you wrote: Chris, ILM and iLok License Manager are not the same thing. It's simply a coincidence that the first letters for Pace's software product work out to ILM but that's not the official name.. Slau On Jan 10, 2014, at 10:24 PM, Christopher gilland mailto:clgillan...@gmail.comclgillan...@gmail.com wrote: wo wo wo! Wait a minute here! ILM is Ilok Manager? that's the same scheme used by JAWS! JAWS made it accessible! Granted, they did so without the physical ILok dongle, and yeah, they only give 5 activations, but! that isn't the point. the point is, if ILok are the ones who made the ILM scheme, and we got it working reliably with JFW, who's to say it would be difficult getting it working elseware for things that need it. Frankly, I see this as just lame excuse to further delay accessible development. I'm saying, I see their responses as such. Call me a jack ass for saying it, but that's my story, and I'm stickin' to it. Chris. - Original Message - From: Scott Chesworth mailto:scottcheswo...@gmail.comscottcheswo...@gmail.com To: mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.comptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 4:09 PM Subject: Re: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility Oh, depending on what version of QT they've used, there hands really could be tied quite tight. That said, I'm pretty sure the iZotope chaps managed to get some semblance of accessibility going pre QT5, so it can be done. Good to know it's on the radar anyway. Thanks for keeping us informed. Scott On 1/10/14, Chris Smart mailto:csma...@cogeco.cacsma...@cogeco.ca wrote: Perhaps also mention that this affects Windows users as well, and that NVDA is a free screenreader they can use in their testing on the Windows side. At 03:16 PM 1/10/2014, you wrote: Thank you Slau, I shared this with the mag as well because so many of the users over there struggle with the same issue. - Original Message - From: mailto:slauhala...@gmail.commailto:slauhala...@gmail.comSlau Halatyn To: mailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.commailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.commailto:ptaccess@googlegroups.comptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 11:04 AM Subject: PACE Anti-Piracy's response regarding iLok License Manager accessibility I was recently put in touch with the president and vice-president at PACE anti-Piracy, the makers of the iLok key and the iLok License Manager software. Since i made it clear that I wished to share their response with this community, I'm pasting it below. In fact, I'm including my original message as well. I'd normally not send as lengthy an email to a developer but, under the circumstances and, given it's impact, I wanted to give it a little more weight. You'll notice that the vice-president has responded and they're clearly aware of the issue and have indicated their intention to resolve the problem. You'll notice that in my response I tried to suggest that the project would surely not take as much work as Mr. Kirk has estimated but, even if their estimate turns out to be correct, the fact that they're still willing to fix it is good news. Still, I think they'll ultimately find that it won't be as complicated as it might appear. I do also suspect that the scope of the work as described by Mr. Kirk also includes the necessary work it'll take to migrate to a newer development platform. That was something that Avid experienced as well and is one of the reasons it took so long to get to the point where Avid could begin work on Pro Tools accessibility. Anyway, you'll find the initial message and subsequent responses below. Best, Slau On Jan 6, 2014, at 8:49 AM, Slau Halatyn mailto:s...@besharpstudios.commailto:s...@besharpstudios.commailto:s...@besharpstudios.coms...@besharpstudios.com wrote: Dear Mr. Cronce, My name is Slau Halatyn and I've been an iLok user since 2002 when I made the switch from an analog multitrack to Pro Tools HD. I'm a blind studio owner and trained audio engineer in New York City. When I witnessed the iLok system at work, I was impressed and, at the same time, relieved to not have to deal with challenge/response and registration code nightmares. Everything went quite swimmingly until the iLok License Manager. Please allow me to digress just a bit… I've been working with many people at avid including Rich Holmes
Re: Third party plugins in PT 11.1, SSD4 in particular
As Slau mentioned, Avid will be doing a presentation on third party plug-in accessibility. A few of us from the list are working with Avid on the issue of developers using proprietary libraries for their presets. Besides Waves, Native Instruments, AIR Expansion and the Ozone plug-ins, are there any other plug-ins that have their own libraries? It would be helpful to get a list compiled and pass it on to Ed at Avid, so that at least these developers can be encouraged to provide the standard presets, until the alternate libraries are made accessible. Please reply if you know of or use any plug-ins that fall in this category. Vinny - Original Message - From: Slau Halatyn slauhala...@gmail.com To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 9:17 AM Subject: Re: Third party plugins in PT 11.1, SSD4 in particular Hi Scott, As you can see, Avid put in a bunch of work to make the plug-in window quite accessible. The issue that remains to be resolved is that a lot of developers use their own proprietary library system with their own buttons. Avid has no control over that since the developers use an SDK to create and compile their plug-ins to distribute. Avid is, of course, aware of this and will, in their upcoming developer conference after the NAMM show, devote two slides in their presentation toward accessibility of plug-ins. Slau On Jan 7, 2014, at 9:20 PM, Scott Chesworth scottcheswo...@gmail.com wrote: Hey folks, Having had a breif bit of time in front of PT 11.1, I'm pretty excited. Unfortunately the system I got to tinker with had only stock plugs installed, so just wanted to start a thread on here to find out how everyone is finding access to third party AAX plugins now? In particular, I was wondering whether anyone has tried the public beta of Slate SSD4 yet? Even if not, it'd be good to find out what the new changes effect for as much third party stuff as possible, so if you've tried anything, let us all know. Cheers Scott -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Third party plugins in PT 11.1, SSD4 in particular
You might want to investigate the very popular and some would say game-changing Slate Digital plug-ins. (VCC, VTM, VBC), and the Air EQ, De-esser and others from Eiosis. Same brilliant guy is behind the algorithms in both product lines.At 02:58 PM 1/11/2014, you wrote: As Slau mentioned, Avid will be doing a presentation on third party plug-in accessibility. A few of us from the list are working with Avid on the issue of developers using proprietary libraries for their presets. Besides Waves, Native Instruments, AIR Expansion and the Ozone plug-ins, are there any other plug-ins that have their own libraries? It would be helpful to get a list compiled and pass it on to Ed at Avid, so that at least these developers can be encouraged to provide the standard presets, until the alternate libraries are made accessible. Please reply if you know of or use any plug-ins that fall in this category. Vinny - Original Message - From: Slau Halatyn slauhala...@gmail.com To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 9:17 AM Subject: Re: Third party plugins in PT 11.1, SSD4 in particular Hi Scott, As you can see, Avid put in a bunch of work to make the plug-in window quite accessible. The issue that remains to be resolved is that a lot of developers use their own proprietary library system with their own buttons. Avid has no control over that since the developers use an SDK to create and compile their plug-ins to distribute. Avid is, of course, aware of this and will, in their upcoming developer conference after the NAMM show, devote two slides in their presentation toward accessibility of plug-ins. Slau On Jan 7, 2014, at 9:20 PM, Scott Chesworth scottcheswo...@gmail.com wrote: Hey folks, Having had a breif bit of time in front of PT 11.1, I'm pretty excited. Unfortunately the system I got to tinker with had only stock plugs installed, so just wanted to start a thread on here to find out how everyone is finding access to third party AAX plugins now? In particular, I was wondering whether anyone has tried the public beta of Slate SSD4 yet? Even if not, it'd be good to find out what the new changes effect for as much third party stuff as possible, so if you've tried anything, let us all know. Cheers Scott -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Re: Third party plugins in PT 11.1, SSD4 in particular
Hi, I would recommend adding MOTU Mach Five to the list *** John André Lium-Netland - Voice/SMS/MMS (+47) 971 68 794 Visit online at www.a-pro-studio.no *** On 11. jan. 2014, at 20:58, Vinny Pedulla wrote: As Slau mentioned, Avid will be doing a presentation on third party plug-in accessibility. A few of us from the list are working with Avid on the issue of developers using proprietary libraries for their presets. Besides Waves, Native Instruments, AIR Expansion and the Ozone plug-ins, are there any other plug-ins that have their own libraries? It would be helpful to get a list compiled and pass it on to Ed at Avid, so that at least these developers can be encouraged to provide the standard presets, until the alternate libraries are made accessible. Please reply if you know of or use any plug-ins that fall in this category. Vinny - Original Message - From: Slau Halatyn slauhala...@gmail.com To: ptaccess@googlegroups.com Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 9:17 AM Subject: Re: Third party plugins in PT 11.1, SSD4 in particular Hi Scott, As you can see, Avid put in a bunch of work to make the plug-in window quite accessible. The issue that remains to be resolved is that a lot of developers use their own proprietary library system with their own buttons. Avid has no control over that since the developers use an SDK to create and compile their plug-ins to distribute. Avid is, of course, aware of this and will, in their upcoming developer conference after the NAMM show, devote two slides in their presentation toward accessibility of plug-ins. Slau On Jan 7, 2014, at 9:20 PM, Scott Chesworth scottcheswo...@gmail.com wrote: Hey folks, Having had a breif bit of time in front of PT 11.1, I'm pretty excited. Unfortunately the system I got to tinker with had only stock plugs installed, so just wanted to start a thread on here to find out how everyone is finding access to third party AAX plugins now? In particular, I was wondering whether anyone has tried the public beta of Slate SSD4 yet? Even if not, it'd be good to find out what the new changes effect for as much third party stuff as possible, so if you've tried anything, let us all know. Cheers Scott -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Pro Tools Accessibility group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ptaccess+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
