[LAU] The future of audio plugins ?

[Ralf Mardorf]

On Fri, 14 Oct 2016 06:39:25 -0400, jonetsu wrote:
>> To get a default set-up for a vocal track as described above, just
>> templates are required, as long as the user is able to realise that a
>> vocal track is a vocal track, the user should be able to select the
>> template with the vocal icon, as easy as turning on the "Track
>> Assistant".  
>
>A template will obviously not recognize the audio it is being applied
>on since it has no intelligence, since it is static.  This is a large
>difference with the approach sketched here, for the enjoyment of a
>discussion.

Analysing a vocal track without analysing other tracks and knowing what
the audio engineer and/or artists wants to do, doesn't allow to
estimate any EQ settings that could be close to something useful, let
alone compressor settings. Providing an exciter as a default tool to
mix vocals is completely wrong. I only could imagine a template for
vocal tracks, that by default adds a British EQ with neutral default
settings and a bypassed compressor and limiter, perhaps a disabled low
cut filter makes sense, too. For the EQ there might be a selection of
template settings available, for the completely clueless amateur
engineer, but by default the vocal track template adds a neutral EQ.

"intelligent" is an absolutely wrong term for such a bad gimmick.

I also don't understand how adding a selection of effects and default
settings is related to communication among the plugins and the host.

It doesn't matter if an analysing plugin adds templates of plugins with
selected templates of settings for those plugins, or if a user simply
adds such a template manually. For doing this, nothing is required that
isn't already provided. There's no need for plugin 1 to share
information with plugin 2.

Regards,
Ralf