BFD3 - Is anyone else having a simply awful user experience? - Page 4 - Fxpansion.com

Forum

FXpansion Forum

BFD3 - Is anyone else having a simply awful user experience?

Product Support for BFD3

Moderator: Moderators

Johnw123
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:30 am

Postby Johnw123 » Wed Jan 29, 2014 4:10 pm

jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:I couldn't disagree more. Although BFD2 was easy to use and figure out BFD3 is far and away better and much easier to use. I'm not sure how they could have made is easier.

It loads kits faster. It has a simple library preview of drums. It has the mixer always in view and it sounds great.

It does not use the same work flow as BFD2 but so what. They found a better way to get the sound out that we are looking for. How is that and awful user experience? Its just the opposite.
I don't want or need to see the mixer all the time because it's something I didn't use in BFD2. I bought out all pieces to their own track in Pro Tools. Ditto for overheads, ambient and room mics. I treat sampled drums like I would real drums - each to their own track as much as I can. That way I can continue working with sampled drums like I would a real drum kit.

If you like it then as my Klingon friends would say - Qapla!


I need to see the mixer. And I also send each piece out to its own audio track. You assume things that are not correct. I use Sonar. Some may know me as John in the Sonar forum.

jackn2mpu
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Sopranos State (NJ)

Postby jackn2mpu » Wed Jan 29, 2014 10:06 pm

Johnw123 wrote:
jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:I couldn't disagree more. Although BFD2 was easy to use and figure out BFD3 is far and away better and much easier to use. I'm not sure how they could have made is easier.

It loads kits faster. It has a simple library preview of drums. It has the mixer always in view and it sounds great.

It does not use the same work flow as BFD2 but so what. They found a better way to get the sound out that we are looking for. How is that and awful user experience? Its just the opposite.
I don't want or need to see the mixer all the time because it's something I didn't use in BFD2. I bought out all pieces to their own track in Pro Tools. Ditto for overheads, ambient and room mics. I treat sampled drums like I would real drums - each to their own track as much as I can. That way I can continue working with sampled drums like I would a real drum kit.

If you like it then as my Klingon friends would say - Qapla!


I need to see the mixer. And I also send each piece out to its own audio track. You assume things that are not correct. I use Sonar. Some may know me as John in the Sonar forum.
What do you mean by saying I assume things that are not correct? Please explain.

I haven't used Sonar in years; stopped at Sonar Producer 8.3.1. There are a couple of Johns on that forum. Started with Sonar 3 and there was no forum but there was a Usenet newsgroup and then moved to the forum when that started. Been on Pro Tools and haven't looked back.
Jack
Pro Tools 2019.6
2012 Mac Pro cheesegrater, 3.46 GHz hex core cpu, 48 gig ram, OSX 10.13.6
BFD 3 and plenty more

Qapla

Johnw123
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:30 am

Postby Johnw123 » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:20 am

jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:
jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:I couldn't disagree more. Although BFD2 was easy to use and figure out BFD3 is far and away better and much easier to use. I'm not sure how they could have made is easier.

It loads kits faster. It has a simple library preview of drums. It has the mixer always in view and it sounds great.

It does not use the same work flow as BFD2 but so what. They found a better way to get the sound out that we are looking for. How is that and awful user experience? Its just the opposite.
I don't want or need to see the mixer all the time because it's something I didn't use in BFD2. I bought out all pieces to their own track in Pro Tools. Ditto for overheads, ambient and room mics. I treat sampled drums like I would real drums - each to their own track as much as I can. That way I can continue working with sampled drums like I would a real drum kit.

If you like it then as my Klingon friends would say - Qapla!


I need to see the mixer. And I also send each piece out to its own audio track. You assume things that are not correct. I use Sonar. Some may know me as John in the Sonar forum.
What do you mean by saying I assume things that are not correct? Please explain.

I haven't used Sonar in years; stopped at Sonar Producer 8.3.1. There are a couple of Johns on that forum. Started with Sonar 3 and there was no forum but there was a Usenet newsgroup and then moved to the forum when that started. Been on Pro Tools and haven't looked back.


I'm the only John on the forum. Others have added extra stuff to their name as I do here. Your response implied that I didn't need the mixer or to see it.

jackn2mpu
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Sopranos State (NJ)

Postby jackn2mpu » Thu Jan 30, 2014 12:40 pm

Johnw123 wrote:
jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:
jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:I couldn't disagree more. Although BFD2 was easy to use and figure out BFD3 is far and away better and much easier to use. I'm not sure how they could have made is easier.

It loads kits faster. It has a simple library preview of drums. It has the mixer always in view and it sounds great.

It does not use the same work flow as BFD2 but so what. They found a better way to get the sound out that we are looking for. How is that and awful user experience? Its just the opposite.
I don't want or need to see the mixer all the time because it's something I didn't use in BFD2. I bought out all pieces to their own track in Pro Tools. Ditto for overheads, ambient and room mics. I treat sampled drums like I would real drums - each to their own track as much as I can. That way I can continue working with sampled drums like I would a real drum kit.

If you like it then as my Klingon friends would say - Qapla!


I need to see the mixer. And I also send each piece out to its own audio track. You assume things that are not correct. I use Sonar. Some may know me as John in the Sonar forum.
What do you mean by saying I assume things that are not correct? Please explain.

I haven't used Sonar in years; stopped at Sonar Producer 8.3.1. There are a couple of Johns on that forum. Started with Sonar 3 and there was no forum but there was a Usenet newsgroup and then moved to the forum when that started. Been on Pro Tools and haven't looked back.


I'm the only John on the forum. Others have added extra stuff to their name as I do here. Your response implied that I didn't need the mixer or to see it.
Beg to differ - there are a number of Johns on the Sonar forum although I know of only one that just has John as their screen name. There is at least one that was there from the beginning and even goes so far back as to be on the Usenet newsgroup as I and a few others were. But that's irrelevant to the discussion.

What is relevant is the mixer bit - I never said or even implied that YOU didn't need the mixer or to see it all the time just that I don't need to see it all the time. Go back to my post above and re-read exactly what I wrote. Give users the option to hide the mixer. Reading comprehension is not one of your strong points I guess.
Jack
Pro Tools 2019.6
2012 Mac Pro cheesegrater, 3.46 GHz hex core cpu, 48 gig ram, OSX 10.13.6
BFD 3 and plenty more

Qapla

User avatar
purtington
Posts: 3181
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 9:37 am
Location: Bristol UK
Contact:

Postby purtington » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:23 pm

Beg to differ - there are a number of Johns on the Sonar forum although I know of only one that just has John as their screen name. There is at least one that was there from the beginning and even goes so far back as to be on the Usenet newsgroup as I and a few others were. But that's irrelevant to the discussion.


Go and do a member search Jack, there is only one user called, "John" Perhaps you're confusing him with John T or some of the other, "Jons or Jonny's" ?

I've been a sonar user since cakewalk audio 9 and was a member of the old use-net forum and then moved to the on line one.
I know it's irrelevant but I'm bored.

Steve
https://soundcloud.com/steve-corr

Scan UK 3XS Audio System
ASUS Prime Intel Z390-A
intel i9 10th gen 900k 3.7GHz
32GB Corsair DDR4 Vengeance LPX 2666MHz
5000GB SSD PM981 M.2 PCIe (OS)
500GB SSD drive for BFD Samples
Focusrite Scarlett 4i4
Windows 10

jackn2mpu
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Sopranos State (NJ)

Postby jackn2mpu » Thu Jan 30, 2014 1:52 pm

purtington wrote:
Beg to differ - there are a number of Johns on the Sonar forum although I know of only one that just has John as their screen name. There is at least one that was there from the beginning and even goes so far back as to be on the Usenet newsgroup as I and a few others were. But that's irrelevant to the discussion.


Go and do a member search Jack, there is only one user called, "John" Perhaps you're confusing him with John T or some of the other, "Jons or Jonny's" ?

I've been a sonar user since cakewalk audio 9 and was a member of the old use-net forum and then moved to the on line one.
I know it's irrelevant but I'm bored.

Steve
No I am not confusing the John here with anyone else. If you re-read what I wrote you'll see that I acknowledged there were many with that name and that I knew of only one with just John. Why the subject of the Sonar forums ever came up I have no idea other than possibly John is connecting my screen name here with one he saw over there and yes - I'm that same person.

The usenet forum was a wild and wooly one that too often got into pissing contests because there was no real oversight - sort of like the way the Coffee House got some time back.
Jack
Pro Tools 2019.6
2012 Mac Pro cheesegrater, 3.46 GHz hex core cpu, 48 gig ram, OSX 10.13.6
BFD 3 and plenty more

Qapla

Johnw123
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:30 am

Postby Johnw123 » Thu Jan 30, 2014 6:17 pm

Steve Hi!

The only reason I posted about Sonar was because Jack posted about Pro Tools. To me it seemed odd.

Yes it was irrelevant but so was the PT reference.

jackn2mpu
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Sopranos State (NJ)

Postby jackn2mpu » Thu Jan 30, 2014 6:53 pm

Johnw123 wrote:Steve Hi!

The only reason I posted about Sonar was because Jack posted about Pro Tools. To me it seemed odd.

Yes it was irrelevant but so was the PT reference.
I don't see the PT reference in my post odd as that's the daw I use BFD2 in. I have yet to use BFD2 standalone.
Jack
Pro Tools 2019.6
2012 Mac Pro cheesegrater, 3.46 GHz hex core cpu, 48 gig ram, OSX 10.13.6
BFD 3 and plenty more

Qapla

Johnw123
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:30 am

Postby Johnw123 » Thu Jan 30, 2014 10:28 pm

jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:I couldn't disagree more. Although BFD2 was easy to use and figure out BFD3 is far and away better and much easier to use. I'm not sure how they could have made is easier.

It loads kits faster. It has a simple library preview of drums. It has the mixer always in view and it sounds great.

It does not use the same work flow as BFD2 but so what. They found a better way to get the sound out that we are looking for. How is that and awful user experience? Its just the opposite.
I don't want or need to see the mixer all the time because it's something I didn't use in BFD2. I bought out all pieces to their own track in Pro Tools. Ditto for overheads, ambient and room mics. I treat sampled drums like I would real drums - each to their own track as much as I can. That way I can continue working with sampled drums like I would a real drum kit.

If you like it then as my Klingon friends would say - Qapla!


The red highlights your PT reference. Maybe you forget what you write.


I don't see the PT reference in my post odd as that's the daw I use BFD2 in. I have yet to use BFD2 standalone.

jackn2mpu
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Sopranos State (NJ)

Postby jackn2mpu » Thu Jan 30, 2014 10:40 pm

Johnw123 wrote:
jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:I couldn't disagree more. Although BFD2 was easy to use and figure out BFD3 is far and away better and much easier to use. I'm not sure how they could have made is easier.

It loads kits faster. It has a simple library preview of drums. It has the mixer always in view and it sounds great.

It does not use the same work flow as BFD2 but so what. They found a better way to get the sound out that we are looking for. How is that and awful user experience? Its just the opposite.
I don't want or need to see the mixer all the time because it's something I didn't use in BFD2. I bought out all pieces to their own track in Pro Tools. Ditto for overheads, ambient and room mics. I treat sampled drums like I would real drums - each to their own track as much as I can. That way I can continue working with sampled drums like I would a real drum kit.

If you like it then as my Klingon friends would say - Qapla!


The red highlights your PT reference. Maybe you forget what you write.


I don't see the PT reference in my post odd as that's the daw I use BFD2 in. I have yet to use BFD2 standalone.
I did not forget what I wrote. What I wrote in my last post was perfectly clear: I didn't see the PT reference in my post odd meaning I didn't think there was anything wrong with it. You must be denser than concrete to have not understood that. You have to learn to read the whole sentence and comprehend what I wrote as was that over your head?
Jack
Pro Tools 2019.6
2012 Mac Pro cheesegrater, 3.46 GHz hex core cpu, 48 gig ram, OSX 10.13.6
BFD 3 and plenty more

Qapla

Johnw123
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:30 am

Postby Johnw123 » Thu Jan 30, 2014 11:51 pm

Jack you have denied posting a reference to PT. When you are confronted with the post you go on a personal attack. Yet I am the one that in your view is having trouble. You can't handle BFD3 where I have no problem with it. Yet I'm the one that doesn't understand things.

You may, just may have hit on a truth I don't understand you. I wont attack you it would be pointless.


BTW the big reason I mentioned that I use Sonar was to point out how silly it is to mention the DAW used when it has no relevance. I was sure you would pick up on that. LOL

jackn2mpu
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Sopranos State (NJ)

Postby jackn2mpu » Fri Jan 31, 2014 1:21 am

Johnw123 wrote:Jack you have denied posting a reference to PT. When you are confronted with the post you go on a personal attack. Yet I am the one that in your view is having trouble. You can't handle BFD3 where I have no problem with it. Yet I'm the one that doesn't understand things.

You may, just may have hit on a truth I don't understand you. I wont attack you it would be pointless.


BTW the big reason I mentioned that I use Sonar was to point out how silly it is to mention the DAW used when it has no relevance. I was sure you would pick up on that. LOL
I never denied posting a reference to PT and I have no idea where you got that from. YOU are the one having trouble. I mentioned the daw I use BFD in because I don't use BFD in standalone. You may think that's silly but I don't.

You don't understand me because you have no reading comprehension.
Jack
Pro Tools 2019.6
2012 Mac Pro cheesegrater, 3.46 GHz hex core cpu, 48 gig ram, OSX 10.13.6
BFD 3 and plenty more

Qapla

Johnw123
Posts: 16
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 8:30 am

Postby Johnw123 » Fri Jan 31, 2014 2:11 am

jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:Steve Hi!

The only reason I posted about Sonar was because Jack posted about Pro Tools. To me it seemed odd.

Yes it was irrelevant but so was the PT reference.
I don't see the PT reference in my post odd as that's the daw I use BFD2 in. I have yet to use BFD2 standalone.
Whats this then???

jackn2mpu
Posts: 270
Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 2:49 pm
Location: Sopranos State (NJ)

Postby jackn2mpu » Fri Jan 31, 2014 2:47 am

Johnw123 wrote:
jackn2mpu wrote:
Johnw123 wrote:Steve Hi!

The only reason I posted about Sonar was because Jack posted about Pro Tools. To me it seemed odd.

Yes it was irrelevant but so was the PT reference.
I don't see the PT reference in my post odd as that's the daw I use BFD2 in. I have yet to use BFD2 standalone.
Whats this then???
At the risk of answering a troll - what the hell are you talking about now? What's what?
Jack
Pro Tools 2019.6
2012 Mac Pro cheesegrater, 3.46 GHz hex core cpu, 48 gig ram, OSX 10.13.6
BFD 3 and plenty more

Qapla

Fenderchris
Posts: 148
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:16 pm

Postby Fenderchris » Fri Jan 31, 2014 9:43 am

How old are you guys - eight?

Forget it. Don't you have anything better to do?

What a waste of forum space!
Nuendo 8.1.10 64-bit and Nuendo 10.2.0 64-bit, Windows-10 64-bit, i7 Quad core 2.67Ghz, 24GB Ram, Roland V-Drum TD-20X, BFD2 64-bit, BFD3 64-bit.
RME UFX


Return to “BFD3”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

cron