Strange X1 version differences?

I mentioned this in another thread but now I'm really starting to wonder.  I bought the Groove 3 X1 Explained video...cool video.  Anyway, the version of X1 in the video definitely looks different than my version.  There are certain items missing from mine that are present in the Groove 3 version.  More importantly, some of the functions that are broken in my version, and listed on the X1(b) bug fix list, work flawlessly in the Groove 3 version.  I'm following along in the video and creating an identical project so that I can try all of the things covered in the video.  Most of the stuff works but there are bugs in my version that are clearly NOT in the Groove 3 version.

Very strange indeed...

BlixYZ


well, it could be system differnces like OS, video, 32 bit vs.64, hardware, etc.

or, could there be a difference between the boxed vs. and  the DL?

all i know is, ass ive said repeatedly, i have only the most minor issues with my X1
i have no idea why ive been spared.

Yeah, I guess it could be due to some of the things you mentioned, however, there are clearly difference the have to stem from a difference in versions.  For instance, the track meters in the Grove 3 version look exactly like the 8.5.3 meters and not like my X1 meters.  Items are missing from certain menus in my X1 version that are available in the Groove 3 version.

Some folks say they are encountering little or no issues while others can't even work...'just wonder?

amiller, yes, all of us who've been trying to work with X1 have made the same observation.  And now it's been said by authorities on this Forum that those tutes were done with a version of X1 which isn't even yet available, 3 months after the release.  Several things are shown in the video that we don't have in the current version - Very odd, but that's the situation.  Scott Garrigus has managed to write his book released this month which covers the newest version of X1 which the public still hasn't had access to.  Odd isn't it?

RB

Strange indeed.

HumbleNoise


I read that Eli who did the Groove 3 videos had a different version of X1 than the one we're all currently using...Not a great scenario, but not that great a mystery either.

Well, yes, actually it is a good mystery--We have this set of tutorials that purport to be demonstrating what can be done with X1, but it's not the version any user actually has.  That's why, for instance, he shows Audio Snap so easily adjusting a clip to fit the tempo, when that actually doesn't work in the X1 that was released.  One time we were told that AS somehow "got broken" just prior to release.  But in another thread we were told it's because we were sold a previous version when AS was still broken.  ---Can we spell B O G U S - ?

Scott Garrigus explained in a thread not too long ago, that he had the next version of X1 to base his book on.  Isn't it like--Odd that these guys have things way in advance, when we're given the impression that all these new problems keep being dealt with, so it would be impossible for them to have a more fully functional version of X1 way back when the tutes were being written and when Scot was writing his book?  Scott said we can rest assured that his book is totally up-to-date--- meanwhile, the rest of us are waiting months on end for a fully functioning version of X1.  Hmm.  There's something very wrong with this picture, but there ya go.

RB

mavafamusic


Ok, so now we are nit-picking. No more bad things .

All of the Reason/Record video tuts don't show the same transport that every one has bought. So what?

It still works just like it should.

You are right - No more bad things - just one simple charge back of my credit card and no more Sonar!

I was looking around here for a moment (looking at the status of the X1b upgrade), and this subject caches my eye.

What I understand was that the video's where made with a béta pre-production version of X1. That's not uncommon, because those people making the video are on a deadline. To have those video's ready in time they have to work with a nearly-finished version. If you carfuly observe the video's you will see there are some graphical glitches (like sides or bottoms of a window garbled or missing). I suspect those glitches where corrected and it was those corrections that had a bigger impact than the software builders where expecting. Do not forget a program like X1 is really big. If you change a little thing at one place it can have a huge impact in other places. Sometimes software building does me think about those guys with a insane amount of spinning dishes on a stick - trying to keep everything from falling by running around and keep them spinning.

Some interesting observation tough. I have been around on the Cubase forum (yes I use that platform at another location, but overall I use X1 the most), and I have seen there are a lot of problems with there new flagship too. Interestingly there are a lot of problems similar to those of X1.... makes me wonder...

On thing that strikes me funny here. I have seen a lot of people complaining about the amount of bugs reported. I think that is funny, because a while ago those same people where complaining about the lack of progress reported here and almost demanded that every bug worked on would be communicated. Well - they got what they wished for... and are now complaining about that. The amount of bugs does not seem to big for me. I wonder ho many people ever read bug-fix listings (if published that is) of big programs like Max3d, CAD programs etc. Some of these listings are several pages long on some occasions!

Well - another thing that strikes me that people here does still not seem to accept that on one system the reported bugs could be present, but not on another system. Thy seem to insist people with good (but I do not say perfect) working X1 installs MUST have bugs because of the bug listings named above. Reality is... There could be a bug for one one person on one particular system and condition, while that same bug is absent on another system and condition. I think a lot of friction is evolving from that difference in experience.

For me X1 is working, but I admit I do not push it to the limit. I am building a new DAW at this moment, so maybe I get my share of bugs shortly - who knows? At least I have a fully working X1 system (yes - with some known bugs.. before someone jumps on my back for saying that), and I get the opportunity to compare systems IF (and only IF) X1 is misbehaving on the new system.

Anyway - I really hope al lot of problems are solved for the unhappy people here with X1b. There will always be people that are not going to be happy tough. That's one thing I am sure about... I am just hoping their number is really low...

Well - its back to work now. See you all after the X1b publishing...

It is definitely odd.

The more I push this thing the more I fall over bugs...but still this thing is pretty solid here...I have had a few crashes but nowhere near as many as to stop what I am doing completely. I've read things that Dl's were more prone to this then other times they were not more prone to this...definitely a headscratcher for sure..

Don't get me wrong, guys.  I kinda dig X1, although, I haven't really pushed it too hard yet...I'm still going through the Groove 3 tutortial vid.  This thread is not a complaint about bugs.  I just find it curious that the Groove 3 version looks differently, works differently and flawlessly while others are pulling their hair out trying to make their's work.
 

amiller


I just find it curious that the Groove 3 version looks differently, works differently and flawlessly while others are pulling their hair out trying to make their's work.
 

amiller, don't forget that even if the Groove 3 video author ran into a show stopping bug it would certainly be edited out for final production so that's another thing we can't really know. How well did X1 REALLY perform for the author? Did he have one of those systems and installs that just 'works' with X1? Or did he run into a few bugs that were edited out? Again, we can't know.

amillerFor instance, the track meters in the Grove 3 version look exactly like the 8.5.3 meters and not like my X1 meters.

I haven't checked the videos, and I haven't read this whole thread, but I searched for "segmented" and didn't find it, so... I'm gonna go out a limb, and say that the difference you saw is between the segmented and non-segmented meter display options, which existed in both 8.5 and persist in X1 - see the Meters section of Preferences. My X1 install defaulted to segmented meters that I was not using in 8.5.

amiller
For example, the presenter highlights two tracks and the hits "ctrl f" which hides all of the tracks not selected and enlarges the tracks that are selected.  When I do the same process...nothing happens...zippo. 

This functionality is documented in the Reference Guide, but it does appear this is one of the several bindings that were not implemented or were broken before the final release somehow. The good news is you can bind it yourself - the function is called "Show and fit selection" in the TV bindings.

I have a theory that a pre-release beta copy of X1 accidentally got sent to the printers instead of the actual release copy.



What other explanation can there be for the nature of the printed copy against the other 'pre-release' versions we all can see working perfectly?