Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Emagic Releases Logic Platinum for Mac OS X

Posted by pudge on from the the-platform-is-the-standard dept.

ericdano writes "Emagic announced the release of the first version of Logic Platinum 5 for Mac OS X. This is accompanied by the simultaneous release of Mac OS X hardware drivers for Emagic's range of USB MIDI and audio interfaces. It is a free download to registered Logic Platinum 5 users." Apple bought Emagic a couple of months ago.

21 comments

  1. Good news by MaxVlast · · Score: 3

    This is good news. The pro audio software has been slow in coming as they seem to access the hardware at a fairly low level, which wasn't permitted in Classic. My understanding of Core Audio in Mac OS X, though, is that it's a lot better than the tools that developers had at their disposal previously.

    --
    There should be a moratorium on the use of the apostrophe.
    Max V.
    NeXTMail/MIME Mail welcome
    1. Re:Good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i agree, good news, but i'm still holding out for Pro Tools. That will make OS X complete.

      Not anonymous, just lazy.

    2. Re:Good news by ericdano · · Score: 2
      Yeah, protools would be great for OS X.

      I'd be happy to see some more drivers out for OS X.....drivers for MOTU products for example...

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
  2. Jaguar and MIDI by Draoi · · Score: 3, Informative
    I went out and bought an Edirol UM-2 a few weeks ago(at the Apple Store in Cupertino!). Works just great on 9 but when I switched over to Jaguar I was curious as to how Apple got around the lack of OMS in MacOS X.

    So I went to the Edirol site, downloaded the experimental X.2 driver, popped it into the right place (/Library/Audio/MIDI Drivers) - and, hey, it works! The app went on to discover most of my MIDI setup including an antiquated Oberheim OB-8. Apple's new 'Audio Midi Setup' app works almost exactly like OMS, except with a much nicer UI & audio config thrown in.

    The downside - absolutely no documentation from Apple, either from built-in help or on-line. There is their audio page but there's precious little about MIDI.

    Apple, BTW, already have Logic Platinum 5.3.0 update on their site. You can check it out here (anyone dare ./ Apple??? :-) ) It's very slick running in Aqua ...

    --
    Alison

    "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein

    1. Re:Jaguar and MIDI by Draoi · · Score: 2
      Oh yeah, and I'm tired of waiting on these guys to release Cubase SX for MacOS X. I love Cubase - been using it since the Atari ST days & I'm sure that Jaguar rollout has been holding them up but now Emagic have pipped them to it.

      So, c'mon Charlie - let's have a copy of Cubase SX soon. Please??

      --
      Alison

      "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein

    2. Re:Jaguar and MIDI by ericdano · · Score: 2
      Naw, I'm waiting for Digital Performer for OS X to be released. That would be very very very slick.

      Of course, if Coda Music could get their ass in gear and get Finale out for OS X I could be happy. Running it in Classic mode is frustrating.

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    3. Re:Jaguar and MIDI by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 2
      The app went on to discover most of my MIDI setup including an antiquated Oberheim OB-8.

      Hey, I have an antiquated Oberheim Matrix-6! Want to trade? ;)

      I have an M-Audio Audiophile 2496 audio/midi card, and I was pleasently surprised to see Audio Midi Setup app find all my gear.

      Now I'm just waiting on Cubase SX...

      :)

      --
      -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
  3. the death of VST plugins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    stage4 has this article that picks up on Emagic's switch to 'audio units' over popular 3rd party plugin formats such as VST.

    Is this good or bad?

    1. Re:the death of VST plugins? by Draoi · · Score: 4, Informative
      Bad - very bad. Cubase SX for MacOS X (when it's *finally* released) will probably be VST only, for a few good reasons;
      • There's bo-zillions of VST plug-ins out there already
      • Cubase is cross-platform & the VST format also works on PCs with a re-compile. So why should companies like Steinberg fork their existing plug-ins; VST for x86 and 'audio units' for MacOS X?
      • VST is popular and seen as 'open'. Audio Units are unknown and are MacOS only and the API is owned by Apple, which will be seen by others as a Bad Thing!
      • Companies like Bias, Inc. that specialise in VST plug-ins now have to do double(ish) the work to support two platforms & standards. Why?
      Just MHO ....
      --
      Alison

      "It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein

    2. Re:the death of VST plugins? by endmusik · · Score: 1

      Emagic are providing a "toolkit" for developers that will help them port their VST's to audio units "in a few hours." Minimum work to make the plugs compliant.... there is absoutely no reason not to support both standards, and Steinberg and Bias would be idiots not to!

      --
      www.endmusik.com
    3. Re:the death of VST plugins? by Tom7 · · Score: 1

      Well, this toolkit (and the final AU spec) don't exist yet, so it may be a bit more wishful thinking than reality. In particular, plugins that have GUIs made with VSTGUI will be tricky to port.

    4. Re:the death of VST plugins? by PastorOfMuppets · · Score: 1
      You don't need to port the GUI. I've been using Pluggo as a VST shell for Digital Performer, and one of the things it can do is strip out the GUI and give you a default interface. It's not pretty, but it works.

      I see no reason why Emagic/Apple's toolkit could't do some thing like that.

      --
      If you don't have anything nice to say, shut up you stupid prick.
    5. Re:the death of VST plugins? by vikingstad · · Score: 1
      Well, the "few hours" porting is just a big joke. Anyone with some programming experience knows that stuff like this takes time. Remember when carbon was introduced, how Steve promised it'd just take a couple of days to port classic applications?

      Yeah right... And we are still waiting for a native Quark :p

    6. Re:the death of VST plugins? by Tom7 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well, most of my new plugins are pretty useless without their custom GUI. Some plugins with a few straightforward parameters work fine with no GUI, but for the fancy stuff a GUI is vital. (In fact, one I'm working on right now has so many settings that it doesn't even use host 'parameters' for most stuff!)

      Anyway, if you are happy with no custom GUI, then you will almost certainly be able to load VST plugins as audio units. VSTGUI is the biggest obstacle to switching over in my opinion.

    7. Re:the death of VST plugins? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A good thing...in time...

      It's not like there was a TON of VST on OSX out already or anything. Most of the major plug-in developers have yet to port to OSX anyway.

      AudioUnits are supposedly a superior implementation - lowest possible latency. I'd prefer that to the 'legacy' of VST.

      It does suck for those of us who have already plopped down some coin for the few VST OSX plugs that are out(OhmBoyz, for instance), but so it goes. I expect AudioUnit versions will be available in time. The dfx guys have already announced their conversions are in progress.

      If Apple/Emagic hadn't dropped VST, then there would be less incentive for AudioUnits development, and the OSX plug-in scene would fragment further. I think this move is a bit ballsy, but will be for the best in the end. At least the standard they are trying to unify under seems to be the best standard out there for host based plug-ins.

      Now, if only MOTU, Digidesign, Bias, TC Works, and Steinberg would get on board with AudioUnits, everything would turn out grand!

      And as far as the VST GUI stuff is concerned - Yes it will be some trouble to convert, but once accomplished, the awesome gui tools in OSX will be more than adequate compensation for developers. For instance, AudioUnits will allow for resizable plug-in windows, something you could not do in a VST gui.

      -jasonic

    8. Re:the death of VST plugins? by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 2
      There's bo-zillions of VST plug-ins out there already

      I'm a Cubase VST user, so I agree. But most of the VST plugs out there are still classic only.

      I did download the great free mda plugs for OS X.

      It would be nice to see Cubase, and Logic support both formats.

      --
      -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
    9. Re:the death of VST plugins? by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 2

      You make it sound like VST plugins are the only audio plugins out there. Don't forget that there are also RTAS, MAS, and ProTools plug-ins. At this stage of the game it doesn't make much sense to have these exist as proprietary entities for all these different software platforms.

      Windows has a similar problem, as audio apps on that side might use VST or DirectX plug-ins.

      Wouldn't it be cool if all your audio apps used DSP plug ins installed at the OS level, If the OS handled the routing between those plug-ins and then talked directly to your audio hardware.

      Emagic even hints that the new Audio Units have better performance than VST.

      Besides, if you're really concerned, you know it will only be a short matter of time before somebody will create a small "wrapper" app which looks to Mac OS X like an Audio Unit which can run VST plugins, so I wouldn't worry too much.

      This is forward progress. This is Apple doing what they should have done with pro audio years ago, and I think it should be met with enthusiasm, not skepticism.

  4. Apple's version of "Embrace and Extend" by Saint+Fnordius · · Score: 2

    Despite all of the nice tones coming from Emagic, I can't help but feel that this is Apple's version of Embrace and Extend. Even if they are open as all get-out, it's still locked to one platform.

    Apple has been working hard recently to control the creative business. It's almost as if they've cribbed a page from Microsoft's playbook, only they swapped the phrase "lower price than the competitor" with "better quality than the competitor".

    It would be interesing to see how Audio Units differs from VST at the code level. Is it an extension, loosely based or totally different (requiring a translator)? If it's just VST on steroids, then *maybe* we can relax.

  5. No OS X drivers for Emagic PCI Cards? by Steve+Cowan · · Score: 2

    I don't know if any announcement has been made about Emagic's plans, but so far no announcement has been made as to whether Emagic will support their own Audiowerk2 and Audiowerk8 cards under OS X.

    This is a bit surprising to me. The cards are admittedly yesterday's news, but they can be had cheaply and surpass the quality of the Mac on-board audio.

    Have any slashdotters heard anything about this? I'll probably check out the Logic Users mailing list too, but the signal-to-noise ratio on there is pretty awful.