Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Many of these plugin companies charge for software version upgrades, it’s common practice.
Just because it’s common for audio companies to gouge people, that doesn’t mean it’s acceptable. I’ll never pay for an Adobe product because of their business model, for example.
Thanks for the responses, guys. I really appreciate them.
I’m sure this was already weighed, but instead of a flat $15 price across all licenses, even the ones with tons of cores and features unlocked, how about a 5-7% rate of the total cost of the license? This would save those (broke) hobbyists among us and would increase the yield for the larger licenses, which I assume would be abused more.
Secondly, I’m a knob twiddler. A hobbyist without a show or program to air. I realize the purpose of a broadcast processor is to “set it and forget it.” But since I play games and movies (requiring more dynamic range) as well as watch videos and listen to music (much less dynamic range), I like to have more settings to tweak. Sometimes I like to crank up the subharmonics and make the bass really throw; other times, I like it more reserved. I’ve come to accept that BA1 doesn’t want to let you break the sound, which I fully understand and appreciate for broadcast. It’s just not what I’m looking for in an audio processor at the moment.
I also really appreciate being able to edit the settings files (to lower the Outmix across the board – essentially reducing the push on the limiter/clipper for more headroom beyond what the final drive allows). This is some of the flexibility I wish to have in the next BAE: the ability to export and edit preset files for out-of-range values rather than having them baked in.
I guess what I want from BAO/BA1 would probably be best coming out of BAE2, as I don’t broadcast. So, I’m not gone entirely… just waiting for the next processor.
I’ve been chewing on this for a good day now. Sorry to say, I’ve concluded that I’m finished with BAO if I have to pay a whopping 10 percent of what I paid for my HD core to reactivate it on a new PC. It already felt like a hassle, but this is egregious. However, I’m still interested in the next generation of BA Enahncer for my home theater, especially if it supports more than 2 channels.
I feel like BAO’s competition currently offers a more fully featured product for less money, doesn’t have bad licensing policies, and is constantly adding new features. I won’t even get started on how the developers actually interact with their community directly.
Again, I’m sorry, and if this gets moderated, I suppose I get why.
edit: I also want to say I’ve been a fan of Leif’s audio algos for a good 20 years now. So, I do feel bad.
Would the BAE market stretch to the additional cost? I don’t think so.
I think this depends on the features and pricing model. If it supports more than 2 channels, for example, that could justify a price bump for a module that HTPC consumers and enthusiasts would likely be interested in. But who knows what’s plausible until we see more about it.
Woooo! First impression of the new website is “oof the font is not very friendly to dyslexia.” I don’t expect a dyslexia-focused font, but a nice full sans serif goes the furthest on screens for me.
But I see there’s a new BreakawayCD playback system, and a spot called BreakawayTools for the pipeline and “new and exciting tools” which I am hype about.
BAE2 must be getting close if the old one has been taken off the market. How long after the Breakaway Broadcasting apps were taken off sale was BreakawayOne introduced? That might give us a ballpark timeframe.
Looks like somebody compiled the latest libXAAC for Windows here https://hydrogenaudio.org/index.php/topic,128545.msg1070817.html
I remember several years ago now, on one of Leif’s YouTube videos that has since gone hidden, he was controlling the lighting of Hue (or equivalent) colored bulbs from an audio processor. Most visualization methods don’t take the processing into account and introduce synchronization issues. It would indeed be cool to animate my whole house when I want to throw a party or get really
REDACTED, in case that’s what this is laying the groundwork for.This wish might be for the next-next generation of non-professional-use Breakaway products. Or it might be very possible once the upcoming BAE2 gets released. Who knows? I’m no programmer, and I have no insight into Leif’s plans.
So, I realize BAE is a Windows-exclusive (X86/64) application. But it would be really cool to get some kind of standalone Breakaway processing on a Raspberry Pi (ARM processor), so I could put an instance between my TV’s optical output and my Soundbar’s optical input. I would also attempt to put it in the car to go between my unit head and my amp, if I could figure that out. Optimally with the aforwishioned 5.1 (or up to 12) channel processing support.
This type of go-between processor box would need a web socket compatible UI since it would be too much to plug in an HDMI cable, especially if I have it in my car. So it would be cool if BAremote also had a BAE2 version I could interface with using my phone.
What are the features in this update for exactly? Controlling devices from BA1? Like… lighting perhaps?
I don’t have it installed on this machine, so I can’t easily check, but doesn’t the BaRemote app offer a way to control the service remotely? It seems like the onus should be on the BaRemote app to accept/intercept the volume keys.
However, I’ve had to write an AutoHotKey script for this feature with another app. I realize you don’t want to, but using the BA1 API to set the BA1 volume based on Windows’ volume settings, which would be controlled by your keyboard, might be the way to go about it.
I use an app called MidiMixer to act as a middleman for my volume solution, but only cause I can’t figure out how to detect MIDI controls in AutoHotKey. Optimally, it would be great to be able to assign MIDI knobs to specific controls within BA1/remote directly.
If the next BAE for home theater gets the ability to process and output 5.1 surround (or up to 7.1.4, as is the upper-end standard nowadays), and supports VST plugins on the input, that one app/host that contains Perfect Declipper now supports up to 7.1.4 channel declipping.
Consider this a request for a 64-bit VST2/VST3 host inside BAE2.
Also consider this a request for up to 7.1.4 channel support in BAE2.Since they’re all text-editable files with a different extension, you could use text-file sharing like a pastebin (or a more secure alternative like Tailscale).
There appear to be a few YouTube videos comparing these two interfaces (actually the 204HD more than the 202HD, but that shouldn’t be any difference). If you haven’t seen any of these, give them a google. I used “how does the behringer umc202hd compare to the motu m2.”
The only thing I think may be relevant is that I heard that the Behringers may have a weaker output signal than expected. I can’t confirm nor deny this personally.
