All I would love is an OS that was stable and ran on both my Apple Mac power PC version G5 and my Intel Macbook Pro.
OS 5 Feature requests
-
-
With more than 7000 sounds available...
A notepad in the COMMON section for writing patches comment would be great. -
With more than 7000 sounds available...
A notepad in the COMMON section for writing patches comment would be great.something so simple, yet so useful. A notepad. I would like to see something like this.
-
I would like to ad a request,
The Virus TI Snow and "normal" TI both use different VSTi VC software. please make 1 universal VC so we can share projects between Snow and TI users!
-
Sure iv mentioned this before but a next preset button for the Virus plugin please
-
Do you mean like the performance lfo where you can draw in the shapes/curves?
If so I second that.
I also put a plus on drawing lfo shapes. That would be great to have something similar to that feature in NI Massive.
-
I also put a plus on drawing lfo shapes. That would be great to have something similar to that feature in NI Massive.
User LFO's maybe
-
CHORD CHORD CHORD PLS.
Built in step sequencer per channel and able to record knobs automation, ala elektron machinedrum.
a similar function found on the "nord" keyboards called morphBuilt in step sequencer per channel ++
-
Buttons to reverse the phases of the oscillators would be killer !!!
-
Add a repeat option for envelopes and a third envelope!
-
Not sure if it's been said because I've not been that active on the forums of late but I'd like to see.
Delay effect: Stereo width to the ping pongs and the ability to modulate it. Some times I want my ping pong to ping and pong but not be full left and right.
-
+ 1 you've got my vote pal
I like all the ideas The Outsider mentioned.
-
Yes, a step sequenzer would be great, but if it can not be made i would like to program user's pattern arpeggios with the front pannel (without the use of virus control)
-
ARP glide like TB-303
YES YES YES & euhhhh YES!!!!!!!!!
and fur sure a STABLE FIRMWARE
because since 2006 i got it i can't remember a really 100 working system ahahahaha -
Internal volume meter....so we can tell when distortion occurs
and......"Chord/s" category
AND BETTER MANUAL
-
Virus Control Multi Part Save and Export Plus Importing the Parts and Automation the parts From old project..
-
Please, do make the store-function of the patch-randomizer work!
It's been years we are waiting for that! -
I presume that this thread was given the title "OS 5 Feature Requests" by The_Outsider because in the thread's first post he made several unrelated requests. Some of the replies, especially early on in the thread, commented on The_Outsider's original requests. That is of course entirely appropriate. But other replies have introduced new requests that are unrelated to ones that had previuosly been discussed in the thread.
May I suggest that, despite the all-embracing-seeming title of this thread, a new thread be started within the Feature Requests sub-forum for each new request (unless, perhaps, you have a long list of them, as The_Outdiser did)? After all, that is the purpose of the Feature Requests sub-forum. I suggest that whether or not you think your request is likely to be implemented in TIOS 4.x or 5 should have no bearing on this, again despite the reference the reference to OS 5 in this thread's title,
Starting a new thread within Feature Requests for each new request is the approach I have taken myself. It has several advantages. It more easily draws the attention of forum browsers (including, most importantly, Access Music staffers!) to new feature requests. It encourages any subsequent discussion in the new thread to remain focused on the new request. In particular, it makes it easy for other musicians to "vote" for the new request, to hopefully help get it some priority, by posting a simple reply saying something like "I too would like to see this new feature" or "I vote for this" or even, as I have seen several times, just "+1".
Simon
-
I presume that this thread was given the title "OS 5 Feature Requests" by The_Outsider because in the thread's first post he made several unrelated requests. Some of the replies, especially early on in the thread, commented on The_Outsider's original requests. That is of course entirely appropriate. But other replies have introduced new requests that are unrelated to ones that had previuosly been discussed in the thread.
May I suggest that, despite the all-embracing-seeming title of this thread, a new thread be started within the Feature Requests sub-forum for each new request (unless, perhaps, you have a long list of them, as The_Outdiser did)? After all, that is the purpose of the Feature Requests sub-forum. I suggest that whether or not you think your request is likely to be implemented in TIOS 4.x or 5 should have no bearing on this, again despite the reference the reference to OS 5 in this thread's title,
Starting a new thread within Feature Requests for each new request is the approach I have taken myself. It has several advantages. It more easily draws the attention of forum browsers (including, most importantly, Access Music staffers!) to new feature requests. It encourages any subsequent discussion in the new thread to remain focused on the new request. In particular, it makes it easy for other musicians to "vote" for the new request, to hopefully help get it some priority, by posting a simple reply saying something like "I too would like to see this new feature" or "I vote for this" or even, as I have seen several times, just "+1".
Simon
+1