warpcanada's forum posts 1

The more different items you have listed as "Izotope RX" (what do they have 80 or more bundles and editions) the more crazy it gets.

It seems to me you should say "this artist uses Izotope RX" (no version specified, no edition specified) and then, as an additional OPTIONAL bit of data, specify editions, if they make sense to add as sub-tags within the main product of Izotope RX, or Cubase, or Protools, or SpectraLayers, or StevenSlateDrums.

I very strongly want ONE "StevenSlateDrums" option not 50.

I hate the way when I search for guitars that every freaking color and edition and special edition is a different guitar/instrument in the search. Awful.

Uh, my 2003 inexpensive Squier Telecaster, from an unknown, long discontinued squier Series that is no longer of ANY importance would ideally be logged as "Squier Telecaster" (that's it!) and then further tagged with a color, my own guitar's specifics (aftermarket or stock pickups, any custom mods, etc). We don't need a specific equipment entry for every damn guitar or every damn edition of Izotope RX.

It's a red guitar, from squier. It's a software product from Izotope, it's called RX. I don't care if someone used RX 7 or RX 8 for a specific album. WHO WOULD EVER CARE?

If it tells me that "3 artists are using Izotope RX 8", why would I care? I want to know how many artists on here use Izotope RX at all.

Here's what I get when I search for Izotope RX. There is no such product, instead there are 900 similar sounding sub-products:

https://ibb.co/BC4DVNg

Suppose on Friday July 9, you record that artist X uses Izotope RX 8 and the very next day RX 9 is released. THere's a 99% chance that artist is now using Izotope RX 9. Logging what version they used this week, when next week it will be different, is dumb.