Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. So I just tested out the Presonus VU meter and I have to agree with Zo, not good at all. I typically use VUMT Deluxe, super awesome. It's behavior is as expected, a 300ms average volume. The Presonus VU isn't really acting like a VU. Instead it behaves more like PPM. Even with the sensitivity all the way down, it's not reacting to an average volume, just reacting slowly to peaks instead. Not usable simply because it's behavior is not predictable. [EDIT] Ok, no joke, I think the Presonus gods were reading this thread. I reopened Cakewalk and I was going to remove it from my plugin list and it came up missing!!! I then uninstalled it, then reinstalled it, and it will not show up. Oh well, no real loss.
  2. Here's a good free one. https://www.tb-software.com/TBProAudio/mvmeter2.html
  3. LittleStudios

    IK Black 76

    It wouldn't surprise me the the serial number associated to the FREE version of the Black 76 has already been flagged. Waves is one company that is fully aware of how a user obtains a plugin license. I imagine IK being another major player in the plugin world also keeps track of how licenses are obtained.
  4. LittleStudios

    IK Black 76

    Can someone explain why someone would want to redeem the code during a future group buy? Am I missing something here?
  5. What I was pointing out is that if you have a stereo track and insert a Waves mono plugin and a Waves stereo plugin, for example, the resulting signal will be mono regardless of the order of the plugins in the FX bin or whether the mono plugin is enabled or not, even with the track interleave set to stereo. The result is the same with a Waves mono/stereo plugin and a Waves stereo plugin. This behavior is not intuitive. I ran tests in Reaper, and the way it handles mono and stereo plugins is far more intuitive. A mono plugin will output mono and a stereo will output stereo. So if you go from a mono plugin into a stereo plugin, the resulting output will be stereo. If you go from a stereo plugin into a mono plugin, the result will be mono, as expected. Now granted, under the hood it's really stereo (two buffers, left and right) and if the signal is mono it just populates both channels of the buffer with the same information. Conversely if the signal is stereo it populates the corresponding buffer with the left and right channel information. I just found it interesting and was hoping to get one of the developers to chime in, not really a big deal at the end of the day. I just use the stereo versions of the Waves plugins and ignore the other versions.
  6. I just did some messing around in Reaper and the plugin behavior is as expected. I first inserted the Waves H-Delay (stereo) on the track and set it to a ping-pong delay and it ping-ponged as expected. The next test was inserting just the Waves H-Delay (mono/stereo) on the track and set it to ping-pong and got a ping-pong delay, too as expected, back and forth in stereo. I did another test with first inserting the Waves H-Delay (mono) followed by Waves H-Delay (stereo) set to a ping-pong delay. In Cakewalk this would produce a mono signal without the left to right ping-pong effect. I was expecting the same result in Reaper, but this was not the case. Instead I got the result that you would want, the mono version sent its result to the stereo ping-pong and output the ping-pong effect. The order in which the plugins are placed in the insert list is important and intuitive. If the stereo effect comes after the mono effect, the result is stereo. If the mono effect comes after the stereo effect, the result is mono. This makes complete sense. Cakewalks approach is not intuitive at all. If my track is a stereo track and the last effect on the track is a stereo effect, the result should be stereo, regardless if there is a mono effect prior to the stereo track. For example, a guitar track with a distortion effect (mono) followed up by a ping-pong delay plugin (stereo) would result in a mono, non-ping-pong delay. What is Reaper doing differently than Cakewalk under the hood to produce the intuitive behavior? Is Cakewalk's handling of mono/stereo plugins by design or is it legacy code that hasn't been updated? I'm not planning on switching to Reaper, no way. I just happen to prefer the way it handles mono/stereo plugins. Would be nice if Cakewalk could change its ways. What is the benefit of Cakewalk's approach to mono/stereo plugins, because I can't think of one?
  7. This weirdness is only coming from a Cakewalk perspective, not sure how this works in other DAWs. I have a mono track, acoustic guitar. I send it out to an aux track. The aux track is stereo. To no surprise, if I place the mono version of a Waves plugin (H-Delay) on the aux track, the result is mono, yay. If I instead place the stereo version of the same plugin, in this case H-Delay and set it to "ping-pong", I get the nice left and right back and forth action in stereo, once again yay. Here's where things get weird. If I place the mono/stereo version of the same plugin on the track, H-Delay, and set it to ping-pong, the result is not stereo, it's mono. If that's not weird enough, as an experiment I first added the stereo version of H-Delay to the aux track, set it to ping-pong, it worked great. I then also inserted the mono version of H-Delay to the aux track, but I disabled it. So now I have both the mono and stereo versions of H-Delay on my aux track, but the mono version is disabled. I was expecting to get a stereo ping-pong delay effect, NOPE. It resulted in a mono signal, even though the mono version was disabled. So simply having a "Mono" plugin on the track, disabled or not, forces the track to be mono. Yes, the track interleave is set to stereo in all cases on the aux track. To simplify: mono track -> stereo aux track + stereo Waves plugin = stereo signal mono track -> stereo aux track + mono Waves plugin = mono signal or dual mono mono track -> stereo aux track + mono/stereo Waves plugin = mono signal or dual mono mono track -> stereo aux track + stereo Waves plugin + mono Waves plugin (disabled) = mono signal or dual mono mono track -> stereo aux track + stereo Waves plugin + mono/stereo Waves plugin (disabled) = mono signal or dual mono mono track -> stereo aux track + stereo Waves plugin (dry signal only or at least no ping-pong) = mono signal or dual mono I'm left to the conclusion that it's probably best to use Waves stereo version of their plugins, this way if the effect is a stereo effect, then the result will be stereo and likewise if the effect is mono the result will be mono or dual mono and closer to the user's expectations. My next question is, if this behavior is true for Waves plugins, is this true for other developers? This could be very annoying. Imagine you have a series of plugins that you want to use. If any of those plugins forces a mono result regardless of the plugins on the track being stereo or not, you would have to create a series of effects tracks (aux tracks) for each plugin as a work around to create a chain of plugins in sequence to get a result that is stereo. In my opinion, Cakewalk should use the interleave (mono or stereo) setting of the track to determine if the resulting output is mono or stereo, not let the plugins determine that outcome. This way if a plugin on a track happens to be coded as a mono plugin, the way Waves mono plugins seem to be, it won't override a following plugin that may be stereo. Noel or someone from Cakewalk, can you provide some clarification to this behavior?
  8. I was hoping their announcement was going to be RX 8.
  9. Understood, my current situation dealt with a project that was setup by another party and I was taking over. They didn't use take lanes. I wanted to use take lanes and thought there has to be a more efficient way to move items into take lanes once the Cakewalk project had already been set up.
  10. I've really received a project started by another party. They have a bunch of takes, all on separate tracks. It would be nice to have a feature that would help with getting these tracks on another track as take lanes. Here's a list of some behavior that would be very handy: Add selected tracks as take lanes Add selected clips as take lanes, maybe an option to maintain time stamp position or to place at now marker on new take lane Add take lanes to existing track or create a new track I imagine this type of tool would most likely function through a dialog box. Just a thought.
  11. I ended up just dragging them one at a time into take lanes. Soooooo much easier to edit that way. Would be nice if there were a way to take existing tracks and have a command like, "Create new track and add selection as take lanes".
  12. I've inherited a project with multiple takes that were originally done without using take lanes. In order to simplify the task of comping, I'd like to pull the separate takes together into take lanes.
  13. Is there an easy way or am I going to have to drag and drop? Not a huge deal.
  14. Also I think some of the confusion stems from the fact that there are currently two standards being used to map 0dBu on DBFS, EBU R68 and SMPTE RP155. I've attached an image that better describes this.
  15. I believe I found the answer at the IK forum: https://cgi.ikmultimedia.com/ikforum/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=14486
  • Create New...