Pathfinder

24 minutes ago, Will. said:

😌 It will sound even better when you do the actual compression to it. 🙂 

Ok dumb question-Do you mean on the way in or in he FX bin after? As far as sounding better. Feel like an idiot!

8 minutes ago, Will. said:

😌 It will sound even better when you do the actual compression to it. 🙂 

Yes that seems to be my weakest spot right now. Working on it!

The vocal, just an old ballad sounds so much better to me since this thread started. It's nice when you get what you wish for. Thanks so much folks. 
I have many plugins but, for waves CLA Vocals and a touch of Breverb 2 or reveberatex64 sound fine to me. I am using the Izoptope stuff for the "printed FX track.
This is a good Sunday. Of course I am not done learning and using what's in this thread alone.

Thanks again

4 minutes ago, Will. said:

Yes it will. You will have both Dry and wet Vocals. Just make sure to Arm both. 

I normally dont need the Dry vocals when i do it. I tweak my effects while the artist do test runs. The  trick is to create extra headroom with the compressor while uou let autotune run in the background on the arm track. 

Thanks. I am copying the thread comments into a word doc.  School is fun and needed  🙂 I don't use AutoTune. Not to sound like a jerk but I am a very good singer-. I am sure I waiver here and there, but I want that. weird I guess. Been the lead singe in every band, trio and duo I have been in and also about 30 years of solo, me and an acoustic.

6 minutes ago, mettelus said:

You certainly could do that, sure, but if you are going to do any post-production, then the baked track is superfluous (you have to run the FX bin anyway to record the other track). There is nothing stopping you from running FX over and over on the same audio, when tracking, mixing, etc.

Getting confused now-maybe a better vocal mic-just kidding. I think. The CM5 was great in it's day. Made by Stellar I think and a great copy supposedly of a very famous vocal mic. Actually one of the OLDER forums (Glennbo and others is where I remember reading about this CM5 many years ago.

This is the mic, I bought it new when they came out:

Stellar CM5 Tube Condenser Microphone (C12/ELAM251 Inspired)

Wouldn't recording an ADDITIONAL vocal track and trying Wills suggestion still leave me with a dry vocal recording (no FX printed). This is  a question.

I us very few tracks since everything but My vocal and my guitar are live, everything else VSTs Only 3 of them)

19 minutes ago, Will. said:

Yep there is. I record my artists or snares with effect to tame the peaks. 

Step 1: Create your recording track. 

Step 2: Add your desired effects and tweak them to taste. 

Step 3: Add an extra Audio Track>Go to the newly created tracks Input and create a NEW PATCH POINT. 

Step 4: Go to your recorded track and sent that to the New Patch Point. 

Step: 5 Arm Patch track and start recording. 

Going go look at this right now- I never have. Perhaps after 30+ years I will actually start to learn to use CW a bit better-THAT is my goal here in my older years!

Thanks very Much

9 minutes ago, Byron Dickens said:

I misunderstood what you were saying about your vocals needing help.

I know I tend to ramble and OVER explain the issue..  Never on purpose   🙂

10 minutes ago, Byron Dickens said:

Throwing a bunch of effects on something that doesn't sound good in the first place ain't gonna make it better.

I never said they sound BAD and I certainly know you cannot fix garbage. I am not talking about garbage. Just BETTER than they are. I just have been researching quite a bit about vocals. I mean just putting the Waves CLA Vocals plug with some adjustments in the vocal FX bus makes a world of difference.

Thing is I keep reading about (yes OUTBOARD FX) putting a compressor, for instance on the vocals on the way in.

sorry I cannot explain things in super record nerd terms, I am trying, I am a guitar player first. Yes, had CW since the 90's. But just used it in the simplest ways since the bass, drums and keys VSTs always sound the way I want and so does my recorded electric and acoustic guitar parts.

Hope that explains it a bit more clearly. Just lookin for help, is all. I'll put in the work but I need to read it and\or watch and listen to tutorials-for me anyway!

On 10/1/2023 at 12:12 PM, treesha said:

Ps I also noticed that certain features/modules would be ok but others cause an immediate problem. Low balance control in my ozone the worst. I did some of the computer tweaking in various optimizing posts on the forum and that helped what i have work a little better too. 

I need to do some searching on the optimize issues. I would have thought an 11thgen i7, 32GB Hi Performance ram and ALL newer NVMe.M2 samsung drives would be enough. evidently not. It really only happens if I try to use the Nectar 4 advanced asst that states "Customizing the Process".

Oh well. 
Thanks very much for the input!

Hope the title makes sense. I have never tried using plugs (like compression\EQ etc on the way IN of the vocal recording. Just old habits, not good habits. Always recorded clean and then added FX etc later.
I imagine outboard compressor etc would be best but I have to use what I have=zillions o plugins Mostly waves and Izotope. Now vocals always come out OK after processing but I know they could be much better. Vocal mic options I have are CM5 large Dia Condenser mic, Shure SM58beta and a few lesser ones.

IAH, I want to leave a nice recorded cd for my family and friends. Better late than never. I was always too busy (my excuse for not learning more over 30 years with CW) playing out in bands etc.
EDIT: I use midi and VSTS for Drums, Keys and bass-THey always sound fine. My guitar also sounds fine. My recorded vocals are, well-HELP!

Thanks

20 hours ago, treesha said:

I have had to stop upgrading any of my izotope plugins because my computer is getting too old (?) to handle them so I get glitches and dropouts. I have read on here Izotope products can be heavy to use. I have closed the gui if I am having an issue and sometimes that helps.

I thought since Ozone 10 advanced, Neutron 4 advanced, Nectar 3 plus, etc never bothered somewhat modern PC nectar 4 advanced would be OK. Evidently not. No refunds of course. Thanks for the reply Treesha

Sorry to have bothered anyone......................................☹️

Works fie on my laptop with Win8.1x64. Also works fine on my Win 10x64 Desktop

Sorry-Venting again!

6 hours ago, paulo said:

The big hint was where I said that I had just  installed the version recommended by CW in this thread and it still doesn't work. 😀

Jeeezzz Sorry! Just trying to help. I'll stop.

I have signed into my account and signed out over and over . No matter what I do CWB (newest version, my first mistake) says Please sign in to your account blah blah blah

Never mind I guess 6th time is a charm

21 hours ago, paulo said:

FWIW I couldn't get  CC to open for me when I tried it after seeing this thread,, so today I installed the version from this link and nothing has changed. I get the window that asks if I want to allow it to open, answer yes and then nothing....... The last time I tried it was when the discontinuation announcement was made and it was fine then.

Do you have an old version installed? Anyway, I never UNINSTALLED the CCC i had. After this thread surfaced I tried to open it-NOPE-no good. I downloaded from one of the links above-installed and it opens fine. It open fine for me. I downloaded the versions listed here just for the heck of it.

I opened a project in Splat today. It was nice seeing the old Splat. I loved it. I know CWB has many advancements over it. Just sayin....

Could someone comment on this:

If I start a new project in Splat and import the midi and audio files from a recent CWB project WITHOUT any vsts, etc. (just the data) and then saving it with a different name or something. Will that work to keep my new projects safe? 

Or just opening the project and quickly saving it with a different name in new location?

Hope this makes sense.

Thanks

On 9/18/2023 at 7:34 PM, Lord Tim said:

I'm not trying to argue with you or convince you of anything, so no need to feel defensive about my question there. This was more me offering the other perspective on this for anyone looking through the thread and going "hey hold on, this is terrible" so they can make their own balanced view of it.

My point is I'm not seeing a real lot of difference personally between a yearly version you have to buy outright that gets updates for that version, and then when the next version comes out, you choose if you want to buy that if you want to upgrade and get updates for that new version, etc and it not being a subscription, versus buying 12 months at a time for the Gibson model and getting exactly the same thing, other than the wording and the option for someone to pay it off if they want rather than just paying a lump sum.

For an example, it's no different to having SONAR 8.5.3 and you've decided not to move to X1. You find a bug in 8.5.3 but you won't get any updates on that because development has finished and is only active in X1, so in effect again it's the same thing - only the current version is getting updates and if you want to benefit from ongoing development, you need to buy the upgrade to the new product.  X2 gets released and now X1 doesn't get any ongoing work, and so on. Sonar 2023 gets released and we get fixes and features for it. Sonar 2024 gets released and 2023 doesn't see any more work, etc. because the focus is on Sonar 2024. Development moves on.

Again, everyone has a personal choice to make once this comes out - each person needs to weigh this up and make a choice, I'm just explaining things so people in general reading this aren't misunderstanding how this idea worked (if this does become the model). But let's not focus on the word "subscription" and more read into what the actual details are, because this thing wasn't ever a subscription as we're used to seeing now with a lot of apps, it was "rent-to-own" rather than "pay us or next month you won't have an app anymore, lol"

Tim

I understand. Just like it when "we" have the "choice" whether to buy the new version year after year. Don't mean or try to be a jerk. 
But my DAW is for my home use as I said. For me. I love CW, as previously stated. But there are some business decisions I do not like and never did. 
As far as buying the new versions I only did because I wanted to, I didn't have to. The bugs that afflicted many, way back, beginning of Sonar, never affected me. Probably because I never used the program to it's full potential.
I am hoping that CW(Sonar, whatever they want to call it) allows me the "choice." That's all!

Be Well

13 hours ago, Lord Tim said:

Just doing a hypothetical:

If Sonar was released each year with a new version costing (pulling a random figure out of the air here) $200, and that $200 would get you each new version (eg: Sonar 2023, Sonar 2024, etc.) plus any updates to that version, does that sound like something that would work for you?

So in other words, you buy a version of Sonar and you get updates for the life of that version until you buy the next version, and the cycle repeats.

That's kind of what the old Gibson model was in a lot of ways:

(Explaining to anyone unfamiliar to it) It was "membership" which basically was a rent-to-own model which basically went like this - you could either buy a yearly membership which got you 12 months worth of use of the app + any updates and once that 12 months ends, the program doesn't expire on you like a regular subscription would do, but you just don't get any more updates to it, more or less like buying a yearly version outright. But this also had the addition of not having to pay that $200 lump sum if you don't want, but spreading those payments over a year instead, and so long as you kept up the payments for that year, at the end you got a program that didn't stop working like a regular subscription would do.

So buying a yearly upgrade of an app outright is really not a lot different to getting that kind of 12-months in advance membership, but just with the added advantage if someone doesn't have the money up front, they have a payment plan option to help make owning the software easier.

Now, to be clear, I have no idea if this is what the model will be going forward - again, none of us know this until there's an official announcement, me included - but if it's something like this then it's kind of got all of the benefits of an outright purchase with the flexibility of a subscription but without any of the "hello we're Adobe!" downsides.

Simple, NO, what you are describing is a SUBSCRIPTION. You can see below I went down that rabbit hole. I have since learned. I will not buy a subscription. I could have been very happy with, say Sonar X1. You want the bells and whistles they add then you buy X2, etc, etc. That's really what all the sonars were about-new features. 

So because we are musicians not ALL OF US are recording studios. I would bet most are just musicians with DAWS. Just a guess.  
Your basically saying you MUST subscribe or face the bugs that were left in the version they sold you? 
Listen, I have already stated I upgraded EVERYTIME from I thing it was CW4? I still have my CWPA9 dvd so I am not sure but I did buy every one after that.
BTW, you say subscribe whereas I say RENT. 

I will just buy the first version and after that I will use Reaper or Studio One.  Hey it's just my choice.

I get that VSTS and windows updates can mess things up but that does NOT happen all the time. I will stay on Win 10 as long as I can-even with my paid versions of 11 pro in my safe.

I am not trying to argue or start any BS, but others stated their prefs so I stated mine. I am a player, I have a small home studio in a small extra bedroom. I like to record, I don't make money off of it. well except I do crete backing tracks with CW.

The other difference no one mentioned in the last page or 2 anyway is that Activation must be thru the internet. That is a change. BUT, I will always have the internet until the day I die. So?
I would have no problem staying on win10x64 for a long time if that's what it took to keep using this latest CWB.

I have PAID for versions of Win11x64 but they sit in a small safe. 

as stated though, I will NOT SUBSCRIBE to ANYTHING. I have what i need for a long time and for years now I always upgrade and use Reaper, kind of like a failsafe. I have Studio one also. Early version. Doesn't appeal to me too much.
So, PLEASE, let us BUY Sonar, not subscribe to Sonar. Just my thoughts. After 30 years i would really love to stick around.

In the old days I hung out on the forums alot. Kind of lost that, for me, with the CWB forums. So special reason, just wasn't the same for me. Not in a bad way, just different. 
Well, Lets Go Sonar++++++ at a competitive price point and all will be Good in CW land 🙂 
 

3 hours ago, Will. said:

That $499 is $499 😌

I commented about the $499 teaching a lesson because I feel it wasn't , well a great comment.
As far as myself, I, have paid for CW, not as long as many of you but I have bought and paid since early 90's thru PLAT and upgrading every single time, never missed one. So over 30 years and counting.
Personally I am not worried about the cost but I do draw the line at subscriptions-That I will not do.

I actually miss the old days with Glennbo, Susan and many others!

On 9/13/2023 at 5:20 PM, Byron Dickens said:

I hope it does list at $499.

Might weed out some of the crowd who are shocked and upset to hear that recording takes an actual expenditure of time, money and effort.

Won't do anything about the crybabies with an entitlement mentality who are still sniveling about what they are "owed." They'd still bitch and moan if it was $1.

Right. That will teach us---??????
 

Should have tried this when it was suggested. Duh!

What a difference when looking thru my FX options, etc.  Very cool! 🙂