Har-Bal 3.0 for Mac and PC version Available Late Dec 2011

See YouTube link below
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRuo8P-APRs&feature=youtu.be
 
Cheers
 
The Har-Bal Team

kson


Thanks for the post. As an owner of your previous version(s), are you planning a GUI update as well as the new features?

We are well aware that many are not impressed by the har-bal look, principally because it isn't skinned and looks out of step with other audio apps, but our philosophical bent on this dictates the way it is. 

We are not trying to be rude but GUI design guidelines for GUI operating systems quite correctly state that an apps GUI should use a unified look and feel common to all applications running in that operating system. Beyond that, skins add nothing to the performance of the application and add development cost to the product, for which we don't have the time or desire to commit to. That time and effort is far better spent in the areas where it is needed, which is developing new approaches to tackle the problem at hand. 

As far as we are concerned, skins are just smoke and mirrors and we find it rather amusing that most skinned audio apps seem to want to imitate "real" hardware, rather than stand on their own merits. It's just a distraction to what is really important, a fashion. We see what we are doing and intending to do with har-bal as something much deeper than that so we don't entertain the idea of skins, and should we ever do, believe me, it won't be imitating the look of hardware. 

Imitating hardware in software is a straight-jacket, a limitation on what is possible. The interface available is potentially so much more versatile than what is available in hardware units, it needs to be exploited. The imitating hardware "fashion" simply binds you to a particular mode of interaction that is not necessarily optimal. 

We are not looking to skin Har-Bal at this point in time. The interface is not perfect but it has served us well and we have actually had very few complaints. It is set to change somewhat in the next release but essentially only in the functionality it provides. We intend developing software that adheres to the GUI design guidelines of the OS in question. The look, we believe, is the responsibility of the OS desktop manager, not the application itself. Only then do you get a consistent look and feel across all applications running on your computer.

The Har-Bal Team

I"ve used 2.0 A LOT and think it's great in the face of all the mastering naysayers.  LOVE it.   Trying to figure out 3.0 by the vid, and admit I'm a little lost in some areas.

Will pounce on this puppy though.   If it is better than 2.0, it'll be the icing on the cake.

Earle, I concur. The look of the product has little to do with the functionality, however, modern looking software puts me in a better mood and is impressive to clients that watch me work. I totally appreciate your product and what it does but a little colour wouldn't hurt.

mixmkr


I don't know... look at CD architect.

Yep, along with Sound Forge, it appears to have been designed circa '98.
 
Sony seems to have stopped development of these two... For awhile now, practically every week I get some emailed offer for one of their video products, and there's never a single word on their audio line...
 

Yeah, those too. SF and CDA look tired. I still use SF but I've retired CDA and now use Studio One v2 to master and render.