Page 1 of 1

LMMS 1.2: about backward compatibility

Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 1:22 pm
by D.Ipsum
Is there a risk that the projects made in LMMS 1.1.3 will be altered in LMMS 1.2?

I remember being disappointed when the Organic code was changed (I don’t remember in which version of LMMS).
Indeed, I had some projects in which Organic was the main instrument, and when its code was modified, I abandoned these projects.

Is there a similar risk with LMMS 1.2?

Re: LMMS 1.2: about backward compatibility

Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:07 pm
by Gps
I believe they fixed the triple oscillator, so it will sound different.

Re: LMMS 1.2: about backward compatibility

Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:18 pm
by D.Ipsum
Almost all my projects contain at least one TripleOscillator ...
I hope these projects will sound better...

Re: LMMS 1.2: about backward compatibility

Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 3:57 pm
by musikbear
D.Ipsum wrote:
Thu Jun 01, 2017 1:22 pm
Is there a similar risk with LMMS 1.2?
mmmMMMmmm there is always a risc
It is however one of the things that has everyones focus.
How many computer programs do you know of, than can take a file made in 2003 and just jam it into todays off LMMS, ant it not only loads, it plays!
I think backward comparability is astonishing in lmms, but there will be a difference in the new 3oc, because the previous 3oc, actually had a bug. The new 3oc have more presence and power.
You can follow the issue here: https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/issues/2047

Re: LMMS 1.2: about backward compatibility

Posted: Thu Jun 01, 2017 5:26 pm
by D.Ipsum
OK, thank you.

Re: LMMS 1.2: about backward compatibility

Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2017 7:33 am
by BaraMGB
Unfortunately we had to remove the changes to triple_oscillator. They leads to a bug which made triple_oscillator unusable in certain circumstances.

Re: LMMS 1.2: about backward compatibility

Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2017 4:39 pm
by Gps
That is a shame because it sounds much better in 1.2 rc2.