Jump to content

Jon L. Jacobi

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Jon L. Jacobi

  1. Live is my main DAW. Alas, it's pretty unique in the DAW world so not a whole lot will translate verbatim. Are you looking to perform live? If then, no slam on Cakewalk as at least it can be used where many other DAWs can't, but Ableton is by far your best option. Everything about it is designed with that in mind.
  2. All you capture with 96kHz is garbage that no one can hear and has to be filtered out anyway. That stuff you see may be dithering to frequencies that no one can hear or noise in your interface or from somewhere else. If you want reduced latency, you can get it with 96 kHz if you can run a small enough buffer but it puts a lot more strain on the CPU. I've heard people argue that those frequencies can affect the lower frequencies and therefore should be captured, ignoring the fact that they already affected the lower frequencies before capture. This guy knows it better than I do. https://xiph.org/video/
  3. Windows on a Mac works just like... Windows. I run Windows on my 2015 iMac 90% of the time and Cakewalk is fine.
  4. I know this has been broached before, but never as a topic title right out there where it's obvious. I'm talking about the ability to enlarge or diminish the size of Cakewalk's interface elements. This is a feature of several DAWs: Live, Bitwig, Tracktion, Mulab, and a couple of others. To me, it's almost a must-have.
  5. I agree that there’s a lot of stuff in not much space. Also that the stop head is outsized.
  6. I think that's a very, very good idea. As a simple switch. Exclusive arm and if you aren't holding shift, it will disarm any other tracks that are disarmed. Alternately, holding shift as it stands now to disable all other tracks.
  7. I asked for it as an option, not as the default behavior. All the DAWs that have this offer non-exclusive arm as well. If you're recording a live band, this would obviously be a pain in the toukus. When you're recording on your own, a track at a time, it's easier. At least for me.
  8. Maybe start another thread for this so the devs see it?
  9. I like the lens functionality quite a bit, as well as that of screensets. Once you have it sussed out, it's fine. My only comment has been that there's a certain amount of overlap, and that "Lenses", "Views", and "Screensets" are conceptually inconsistent and not particularly accurate. I'm pretty sure I would've reached understanding a lot quicker with something such as "Overviews" (Global view?), "Views", and "View Sets", for instance. There's quite likely something better. Not a big deal. Just throwing it out there.
  10. Note that this doesn't make the font any larger, but it makes it significantly sharper.
  11. I'd like to see the entire interface made scalable, though I don't expect to see that anytime soon. What I've done is increase the Windows DPI setting as you have which makes the tiny text not quite so tiny, but as you have noted, it's still hard on older eyes. I wish Windows had per application scaling. But I don't find the Time Ruler any worse than anything else. Have you tried setting the hiDPI scaling setting?
  12. Ah, then I did this myself. I'm finally getting it, I think. Lenses can actually hide stuff as well as remember the windows layout if you so choose. Screensets are just arrangements of the views, yes? Sort of a sub-lens, though if I remember correctly, they were implemented first. I'm not a huge fan of the language involved here. Obviously, I didn't find it particularly intuitive or consistent and there seems to some overlap. After that, it was all me mucking around without reading the users guide, though I did a bit after I started all this. Part of my review process, though this is not for a review.
  13. I guess you could call it undock and close, but all I really want to do is hide it. I actually prefer it docked, I just found that I could get rid of it by undocking it and closing it. Maybe there's another way? I find most DAWs massive overkill in terms of features and visuals so I like to hide as much of it as I can. Collapsed doesn't count as hidden in my mind. As to the screensets, I know there's supposed to be a module in the control bar, but I don't see it. See the attachment. What am I missing?
  14. I think I described it pretty well, but... 1. I open the docking menu and select undock. 2. When the window/view is undocked, I use the close window button to close it and it goes away. 3. To bring it back, I go to the Views menu and select the appropriate view. I have not used screensets (shouldn't it be view sets?). I don't even know where they are.
  15. I personally like the original suggestion. The folder as a bus. You don't have to use the functionality if you don't wish to, but it's there is you want it. KISS.
  16. Logic does this. It is convenient and I've never had it erase anything I've wanted. I'd assume it's time and content (or lack thereof) based however.
  17. There are lenses that I've created that don't include some of the collapsible views. But to get rid of the inspector, etc. I must float, then close. A menu item for hide, along with the other dock options would be a cleaner approach.
  18. You need a compatible BIOS to boot from NVMe, but Windows will recognize it for secondary storage under any circumstances. On a PCIe card, that is.
  19. Tempo is a little different than other data in that changes the timing delta between note onsets and other data, but even very fine tempo changes shouldn’t bog playback down. And limited human perception renders pointless the need for very fine changes. Why proportionally?
  20. It will probably will never cause an issue. Still, save the power, turn it off.
  21. As to the inconsistent naming conventions, I'm still all about fixing those.
  22. To be honest, I don't even see the screensets module in the early release though I've read about it and remember it. I find lens and screenset completely redundant, so maybe the latter is gone. But they've started using the lens concept for the track controls (first image) so why not settle on that nomenclature as simply any type of layout? Also, it's the Event Manager in the Event List (second image) as you suspected. I'm not saying "views" is unintuitive or completely out of context. Alone it's fine. But I stick by my assertion that "views" and "lenses" are too close conceptually, will cause mild confusion to begin with, and for lack of a better explanation, just don't sit well together. Then again, you use a lens to magnify a view. Or view through a lens... Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe changing it from a noun to a verb "view" would be better. Unfortunately, I don't have a brilliant alternative for this other than perhaps calling them lens components. Lens/lens components is not what I'd call intuitive, but easily understood once explained and more consistent. Kind of foo-foo though... And of course this is all relatively trivial, but brains are strange contraptions and little things add up.
  23. I think the program might be quicker to learn if the naming conventions were more consistent. For instance, you have lenses for screen layouts and track control layouts, but a track manager and an event list manager for those module's layouts. Perhaps go with the lens thing with "Manage Tracks Lens" and "Manage the Events Lens" and lens anywhere else a layout is being defined. Then you have the views menu. Views by itself would be fine as a naming convention, but now it seems to run up against the "lenses" concept. I first looked for these "views" under the Windows menu. Perhaps put them there, or rename it from "views" to "modules" or "panes"(etc.) which is what most of them first appear as. Also, you have the Staff, Console, and Piano Roll, etc. which have "view" tacked onto the name, while the Event List, Markers, etc. which default to the same pane, don't. Adding the word "view" is redundant when you've already categorized them with the menu heading. If you want to save some space, you might rename the Help Module simply Help. I think everyone knows it's a module. Also Track Control Manager would be more accurate as Track Controls Manager. None of this is a huge deal as you figure out what everything is readily enough, but they are things I found momentarily confusing upon first glance. Maybe I'm missing something as I haven't used Cakewalk/Sonar in a very long time. Great job on the updates!
  24. Hmm. I'll try it again, but I selected several clips on different tracks, and the notes did not automatically appear. I had to use the drop down menu and the track selector to see clips from multiple tracks. I'd rather see the track colors, and simply filter out the non-required data. For that, perhaps add Lens functionality so you don't have to deselect so much stuff. My primary recommendation is to simply make the methodology the same no matter what the view. Learning a different one for each view makes for a longer learning curve and I'm assuming that with all the improvements, there will be a lot of new users.
  • Create New...