User 905133

Yeah. Sometimes the final release is not the same as the last beta.

If this is going to be changed in the last CbB update, I would prefer either a preference check box that says, "OK to screw up my track names" with off / unchecked as the default or maybe a check box in the right-click context menu next to the Replace Synth selection options. As for changing user assigned track names, I really feel that is rather intrusive. Not sure why people can't just use the button or the Synth Rack if they get confused. Also, is there any possibility (1) undo/history might not be able to track all the name changes/replacements and/or (2) replace all tracks with this synth might get messed up? And if it any of this gets anything messed up, does that mean CbB will forever not work the way it has worked for the past several years?

Interesting. I never noticed this because I use mostly Instrument Tracks (usually combined) with some occasional MIDI Tracks either pointed to a synth in a combined Instrument Track or sometimes a split Instrument/synth only track. But I just tried. I get what seem to be inconsistent darkening or lightening depending on which track is soloed and what track the midi track is pointed to. I only did a very quick test because I never noticed this before, but something is going on when an Instrument track is soloed and an additional midi track is unsoloed. The unsoloed midi track does lighten up while the Instrument Track stays dark. Since it has been announced that there will be only one more update to CbB, I worry that if this is changed, what happens if there are regression errors. BTW, normally I also often use Instrument Tracks and additional MIDI Tracks in the same folder. That might be part of why I never noticed the darkening/lightening before. But, its really wild if you have a folder with an Instrument track and several midi tracks inside pointed to different synths and one synth is in a track outside the folder! Soloing the track folder soloes all of the relevant instrument tracks, but unsoloing the track folder does not unsolo the Instrument Track outside the folder! Hmmm. Trying to resolve all this for the last CbB update worries me that some new issues will be added in trying to resolve this. 😞

For people who name tracks by function/purpose in the context of the music/composition, who might include an abbreviated or shortened synth name, and/or who might include other useful information in the track name, having the original name of the track wiped out by an automatic process just to have the name of the replacement synth in the track name field seems like it would cause an awful lot of unnecessary work. Since the Synth Rack and reflects the name of the replacement synth, if someone doesn't want to click on the track button to see what synth is there, they can keep an eye on the Synth Rack. If Replacement Synth is set up to change the name of the track automatically, the user designated track name would have to be written down, put into the Notes Browser, restored manually, etc. every time a different synth is swapped in. I can't be the only one who uses my own choice of names for tracks. On second thought, maybe I am and most people just leave the name of the synth for the track name instead of having a more purposeful name.

Thanks for confirming you were talking about default [automatically assigned] track names. I do remember sometime within the past year (possibly before that), there was an issue with track names when they were moved and that the issue was ultimately fixed. IIRC, (1) it had to do with maintaining the order of tracks and (2) there was a difference between the user's order and the creation order. Unfortunately, I don't recall if there was a difference between automatically named tracks and user named tracks.

With the unprecedented 65% off sale and the ridiculously low prices people were discussing as possible glitches in the "Melda 15th Anniversary Sale - 65% off bundles" thread, I also wondered. But I thought that maybe it was just a change of who had set up sale price calculation mechanics--that is, a technical change, not a "money grab." For more discussion of the sale to Image Line, see the KVR > MeldaProduction thread that begins sometime in February. There is at least one post from Image Line confirming their recent acquisitions.* As many know, a few months ago Cherry Audio also announced a "Not For Resale" purchase policy (going forward license owners would no longer be able to sell/transfer their purchases). I couldn't help but wonder what was going on with that, too, including the possibility that Acoustica was trying to make the Cherry Audio product line more desirable to purchase (among other possible reasons). With all that's been happening my concern has been that there is only Melda's good faith word backing up the "lifetime updates." We have no idea what the terms of the sale were. When I posted my comment on 6/19/2023, I didn't want to be alarmist. I still want to maintain a positive / hopeful attitude (all will be OK). But with Benn's Op-Ed- style Commentary, and mettelus' concern, I might as well share some of my worries, too. Some people say "You can't change City Hall," but as we know when it comes to the practices of Corporations, all rules, terms, policies, etc. are subject to change at any time. Caveat Emptor! *ADDENDUM: The comment about Image Line's recent acquisitions including Melda is in a thread entitled "Image Line Acquires UVI." From the Image-Line post: From Vojtech:

I assume you are referring to the case where people don't name their own tracks. I would be horrified if the Replace Synth... changed the names of my tracks. To me it would be a serious bug if the software changed the names of my tracks. I suppose if each track name has a flag set for cases when the name was assigned by the software (or vice versa), user-named and auto-named tracks could be treated differently by the Replace Synth... function. I have no idea if there is such a flag.

Let's get some more traffic headed his way!!

I have one of those usb floppy drives and even thought of mentioning that as an option, but I didn't think that 1992 laptops had usb ports. In fact I looked up usb and the internet said "USB (Universal Serial Bus) was originally developed and introduced in 1996 as a way of setting up communication between a computer and peripheral devices by replacing many varieties of serial and parallel ports." Never mind I had no idea laptops had 3.5" drives in 1992.

I previously asked if Workspaces will be retained. The answer was yes. But I assume if the Cakewalk Sonar UI doesn't have certain features (for example custom themes), certain UI changes will be meaningless. However, if initially theme-switching is excluded from the early releases, maybe it will be included in a later release in some modified form. I would assume if this is the case, the team would choose to keep the parameter in the *.lns file (maybe with a warning plus a check box to ignore this warning in the future or maybe a timed out notice) and switch all the UI elements that do work with the new UI system. However, with a new UI system, this might not be practical. This is 100% speculation + 100% optimism on my part. I have no standing with Cakewalk except as a user. Theming capabilities will change and there may be little to no customization in the first release of Sonar. That said, a tremendous amount of thought and effort have gone into this rework and we hope that the need for theming will be greatly diminished moving forward. The way that theming works in CbB is tortuous, so we're moving to a simpler, more elegant presentation idiom. The core customization capabilities that are needed most will likely be introduced in the future, but in a far more user friendly way than what's available in the current theme editor. Based on this I think its safe to assume that if custom-themes based on the way they are under CbB are a big part of your reason for switching Workspaces, that will be different. I am also open to the possibility that the Workspaces management system might be improved. I'm taking a wait and see attitude. (We will find out when we find out.)

LOLOL. Its been a good couple of years since you've given me shit. I was due!!!!

Background reading: https://www.digitalsoundfactory.com/wp-content/uploads/Proteus-Legacy-Library-User-Manual.pdf https://www.digitalsoundfactory.com/wp-content/uploads/E-MU-Proteus-Rack-Library-User-Manual.pdf Keep in mind, these only make use of the repackaged samples/sounds for the romplers. Evidently, there was enough interest a year or so ago for NI and DSF to work together. If they continue in this vein and do the same kind of thing for the sampler portion of the Emulator X, who can say that there would be no interest for it because its ancient? I had mentioned this as a potential opportunity for Bandlab long before NI did the romplers. Considering all the user demands for Cakewalk to have built-in sampling abilities over the years as well, it seemed to me that a strategic partnership be tween Bandlab and DSF might have benefitted consumers. Addendum: https://www.airmusictech.com/expansions/planet-earth.html https://www.airmusictech.com/expansions/proteus-2000.html https://www.airmusictech.com/expansions/vintage-pro.html https://www.airmusictech.com/expansions/xtreme-lead-1.html https://www.airmusictech.com/expansions/virtuoso.html https://www.airmusictech.com/expansions/mo-phatt.html https://www.airmusictech.com/expansions/ensoniq-asr.html

That's because E-Mu products were abandoned. There seems to have been enough interest in Sound ROMS for the hardware over the past decade or so, that they were regularly being sold (not just listed, but sold) on third party platforms for more than E-Mu was selling them. Legal copies of Sound CD ROMs also commanded decent prices. Unfortunately, people started selling pirated copies and then making copies available on sharing sites. Those pirated copies and the availability of sharing sites cut into any incentive to reissue legitimate copies. Not sure if DSF had the rights to do that. Considering that Emulator X3 worked well with SONAR, we cannot be sure what the OP meant by memory leaks and bugs. As far as "there is no one around who still; cares about the Emulator X3 software," based on all that has been written over the years, I would argue that the comment is more of a reflection of what Creative L:abs did to kill the brand than the usefulness of the software. On the hardware side, there has been enough interest for several people to work on designing Sound ROMS. From what I have seen, at least one person has been successful. Of course, as we all know, despite all the limitations, flaws, and failings of software (not to forget about the various sales/marketing schemes consumers have issues with), no one wants hardware any more.

In case it wasn't clear in my post, I was talking about the Proteus X/Emulator X software. I have not seen DSF do anything with the Proteus X/Emulator X software. If he does have an agreement with Creative Labs to be able to revise and make available the software as well as the samples, that would be good to know. I have tried to find out the details on line, but from what I have seen he only has the rights to convert, repackage, sell, and market the samples/sounds. There are those of us who have legally owned rights to use the samples/sounds. Since the software has basically been abandoned, it would be nice have the software updated. Neither Creative Labs nor DSF has shown any interest in doing that so far as I have seen. Having looked at the documentation for some of the new products which can use the remarketed samples/sounds, those products do not offer the capabilities of the Proteus X/Emulator X. Your "best bet" is IMO inferior at best. 😉 PS: In my experience, before the recent issues with authorizing a license, the Emulator X3 software worked exceptionally well under Windows 10 Pro and was very efficient.

In between the time of the original discussions from 2001 and now, I have had issues with Emulator X3, too. For the longest time after Creative Labs abandoned the software, the authorization server still worked (based on my experience). However, it no longer seems to work. On my previous audio PC on which Emulator X3 was authorized, the software sometimes worked and sometimes gave an error message and Cakewalk refused to let the plug-in work. On my newest audio PC, I cannot even get baseline authorization in standalone mode. I really wish Bandlab would have offered to take the E-Mu software off the hands of Creative Labs and updated it to be the sampler that a number SONAR/Cakewalk users have been asking for over the span of several years. As long as people have resurrected this ancient thread, I just thought I'd mention that Emulator X3 was a power house program that even today uses fewer CPU resources than a number of contemporary soft synths. And for those who don't know, the standalone version was effective handling 64 channels of audio.

Yes, it was. I got as a freebie several years ago (2020). I still haven't found a good use for it, although I have tried several times. How do others use it?

I just used Ctrl+S with the focus on a VST window [Instrument] and CbB saved the project. UPDATE: It also worked with a VST3 [Instrument]. UPDATE 2: It also worked with a VST3 [Audio FX]. UPDATE 3: I just changed a whole bunch of things and whenever a VST/VST3 had the focus, Ctrl+S worked. So far the only ways I could get Ctrl+S not to work properly was when Browser > Notes was in edit mode when a floating/undocked window had the focus.

I don't think the size is an issue here, but just as an FYI in case in the future you want to change the size on an image, you can. Here I just used the link to your image and reduced the width from 1000 to 650 and checked the box to keep the original aspect ratio.

Good lord, for whom? Just to clarify any possible misinterpretation, I was not saying that to me shaming CbB-only users is fun. As is evident by the context, I was squarely against those who tell users of older versions of SONAR/Cakewalk that they shouldn't be using older versions. I was saying that there might be legitimate reasons why users of CbB might not opt to use either of the new products, a point to which you agree: While were on the subject, obviously the other wording on the Forum's Home page also would have to be changed since Cakewalk by Bandlab and CbB are mentioned in the sub-forum descriptions: Thanks for the opportunity to clarify my previous post.

I knew that Randy Newman wrote this song , but thought that his version came out after it was a hit with Three Dog Night. So, I looked it up and just learned that Randy Newman gave it to Eric Burdon to record first. Does that make Randy Newman's version a cover of a cover?

I didn't get the notice today. It might be because I did a proactive activation refresh a couple of weeks ago--just before some people started getting bent out of shape in the Cakewalk Next/Cakewalk Sonar thread. From June 9th.

Ctrl+S is what I have for Save. Did you change your key bindings? Or maybe I changed mine? Either way, you can change it. Did you look at Global Bindings? Does this table help? I am in the US. Maybe you have a keyboard for a different country?

Is this a reply to my comment? I could be wrong, but it looks to me from the screen shots posted above, Tracks 1 - 6 and the Metronome and Preview bus are being sent to the Master bus, but the Master bus is being routed to None / Ninguno. Yes, there could be other audio issues, but if it were me, I'd check the destination for the Master bus to make sure it is routed to a sound card/sound device. It would also be nice to see where the Hardware Output console strip is being sent. Since the system only has one audio output, if the Hardware Output strip isn't pointed to it (the Focusrite), that could be an issue.