Craig Anderton

Well I'm not Steve, but I think the answer is that when you rename it, CbB won't recognize it, and therefore create a new TTSSEQ.INI file. In similar situations, I add an X to original file name so I can recognize a file name that's changed, in case I have to revert to it. Hey, what do you think of the Z1?

I believe IE has been officially "deprecated" by Microsoft. Maybe they just got tired of people calling it "Internet Exploder."

Dude - I must emphasize to you how serious it is to violate a non-disclosure agreement. That was an INTERNAL DOCUMENT only!!!

FWIW - my experience with Asian companies in general is that they tend to think longer-term than American companies (whose orientation often skews toward the current quarter's bottom line). So a lot of times when doing analysis, you have to consider what an initiative is designed to accomplish long-term, as opposed to just thinking about what immediate returns it can provide.

Customer acquisition and brand visibility isn't cheap. BandLab got HUGE publicity when they saved Cakewalk. That kind of positive PR is difficult to buy, at any price. What's more, it made a statement: "We're saving the program you love. Enjoy!" If that isn't going to make people think well of BandLab, I don't know what will. I think Meng has re-discovered a principle that too many companies have forgotten: the customer matters. Who here isn't grateful for what BandLab has done? And if you're a guitar player looking for a new guitar, or a mobile interface, or a case for carrying your gear, and there's one from one of Meng's companies - all things being equal, aren't you likely to support the guy who saved your program? Of course, Cakewalk is part of a bigger picture which has yet to be played out. I think of Cakewalk as a race horse that's hanging out in a stable, being well-fed and groomed, while waiting in the wings for the next race...whenever and whatever that might be. I don't hang out with Meng, but I have met him and talked with him. He's young, smart, and driven. Those kind of people tend to produce interesting results.

BandLab is more than Cakewalk...it's music stores, guitars, instrument cases, interfaces, and media. In today's business environment, there are aspects of doing business that are more important than cash. How people here would have heard of BandLab if they hadn't bought Cakewalk? The acquisition cost of that number of users was probably more than what the program cost...and I bet a certain percentage of those people are at least going to buy Harmony or Heritage guitars.

Well after my semi-humorous response, here's what I think of the current situation. Again...this is speculation on my part. CbB is a mature program. It really doesn't lack anything that's needed to make pro-level music. You can point to features that other programs have and say "CbB doesn't have them, therefore it still needs ongoing development" but you can also point to features CbB has that other programs don't have, like Upsampling, Mix Recall, the QuadCurve EQ, etc. And it's important to note that CbB has been receiving ongoing development. In addition to bug fixes and smaller changes, the program has implemented ARA2 and elastique pro time-stretching. Neither is trivial. And, the latest iteration of the export function hints at further integration with BandLab, which could turn into a big deal over time. So the bottom line is CbB does everything did SONAR did, which a lot of people thought was enough for a DAW, but it now does more. If I were BandLab, I wouldn't feel compelled to prioritize Cakewalk over introducing a new line of guitars (which I believe will be well-received) and some other current BandLab initiatives. CbB continues to evolve and be maintained, which I think says all you need to know. Personally, I'd like to see an online store where people could buy the "missing pieces" that were in Platinum but aren't in CbB. But what with Waves, Native Instruments, IK Mutimedia, Arturia, Melda, and a zillion other plug-in developers, it's not like we can't get work done Bottom line: Don't worry, be happy, make music.

A few more opinions... The main music delivery system used to be speakers, so I mixed on those and used headphones as a reality check. Now the situation is reversed, I think at this point headphones may be the dominant music delivery system (I don't consider laptop speakers and their ilk as relevant, I mean what people actually listening to music use). As such, a lot of people use earbuds. The ones designed for telephone use tend to be more like open-back headphones, but quite a few insert into the ear canal, and are more like closed-back headphones. The conventional wisdom is to use open-back headphones because they sound more natural, i.e., more open than closed-back headphones and somewhat more like speakers. However, I simply don't know if that's equivalent to how most consumers hear music these days. My main headphones are the closed-back KRK KNS-8400, because of course, you need closed-back earphones for tracking. But just as we used to mix over multiple speaker systems to get an average, I mix over multiple sets of headphones, and do the reality check on speakers. Mixes done on the KNS-8400 actually do translate well, but only when mixing on them at low volumes, because then you don't have any issues with sound waves bouncing around inside the cup, and you don't get the listening fatigue problems typically associated with closed-back earphones. Ultimately, I think the best option is a set of closed-back headphones for tracking, open-back alternating with closed-back for mixing, and of course, good speakers. I start my mixes on headphones, and end up on speakers. Tweaks I make to accommodate speakers always make the mixes sound better over headphones as well. I also have multiple sets of headphones, from Ultrasones with treble that will rip your head off, to Beats that have a response worse than Apple's white iPhone earbuds, to the KNS-8400, to really nice open-back AKGs. A mix that sounds good on all my phones has at least a fighting change of sounding decent on playback over the zillions of different systems out there , Hope this helps.

I don't know, Summer NAMM isn't really a technology show. I assume Noel will be there to see what various companies are up to...or maybe just to buy another guitar I suspect BandLab's big focus will be their Harmony guitars, Mono cases, and the like, but I'm just speculating based on what seems logical.

At the moment, Cakewalk by BandLab is headed to Summer NAMM in Nashville

To elaborate...this is mostly a problem with anything involving time (delays, reverb, etc.). This is why I usually record and mix to a click, then add subtle changes to the final, mixed track just prior to mastering.

Make sure you're using the latest Kontakt update...and that the developer is too

That's also a very good point, because I've often said if I had to choose between only playing or only playing the studio, I'd choose live. I guess there's enough residual old school in me that I think live performance has a vitality that's hard to match in the studio, and following your ethos helps to give a more authentically "live" feel. (At a seminar during Q&A, someone said he couldn't get much more than 120 tracks or so, and what would I recommend he do. I said he didn't need more tracks - he needed to take a course on arranging .)

Personal opinion, but...I find every track you add diminishes the importance of the remaining tracks. This isn't always a bad thing, of course, you don't want all tracks to be equally important. A lot of my songs have only 8 parts, although some parts might be spread over more than one track (e.g., different processing on the guitar part in one section of the song, so it's on another track). I used to layer vocals a lot, but I'm getting away from that because it makes the lead vocal less intimate. Instead, I'm going for more harmony parts. If you want to hear the kind of mileage I get out of eight tracks, check out my Simplicity album.

It's true that Melodyne isn't always 100% accurate, but before you start in on manual editing , try some different detection algorithms first.

Or, use the Process > Apply Effect > Normalize to the desired peak value. I have normalize on a keyboard shortcut so it doesn't take much time to, for example, drop the peak to -6 dB.

The book covers tempo track changes, but not specific techniques for different programs because they all vary. Fortunately, CbB's is so easy to do it seems like there must be more to the story...but there isn't. Note that for this technique to work, there has to be some semblance of a recognizable rhythm. If you have that, you should be okay. After you play your piano part, drag it up to the timeline. CbB will analyze the part and create a tempo map. It really is that simple. If the results aren't correct, undo, then set Melodyne to a different detection algorithm and try again. I've had really good luck with this. I did a demo once at Sweetwater when the tempo did a massive, fast drop on a rhythm guitar part, and CbB followed along. Once you have the tempo map, lay down your AD2 part. Because there's a tempo map, the measures and beats in the MIDI editors will follow that map. You don't have to do anything special in terms of laying down the MIDI part. For example, if you want to quantize something to every 1/4 note, the quantization will shift the notes according to what the tempo track indicates. You may find the video on this page (dated April 4, 2016) helpful. It starts off showing a track that already has a pretty consistent tempo, but then uses a big band track that's more of a challenge because it starts with a pickup.

When creating a tempo map in CbB by dragging audio up to the timeline, experiment with different Melodyne algorithms. Sometimes Precussive works best for me, sometimes not. Overall, I've found this particular feature to work very well. I've analyzed a lot of songs by taking advantage of CbB's tempo mapping.

Glad to help!

It's been a while since I used the original (upgraded to a FaderPort 8), but the main gotcha is you need to enable both Key Aftertouch and Channel Aftertouch under MIDI > Playback and Recording. There's more information here. If you need to go further, also read this info from Cakewalk. as well as this additional resource in the Presonus knowledgebase. Note that the FaderPort is class-compliant, so it doesn't need a driver per se; the Universal Control software should update the firmware, as described in this article (which also has a warning about not using the CD-ROM that came with the unit). I don't know if the faderport.dll profile is available, but you can always run it as a Mackie control device.

Very cool and helpful

"Mixing down audio" should not go on forever. It seems there might be some other issue happening here. What happens if you try cutting a small clip and applying the effect to that? Another option is to send the guitar track to a patch point, set the patch point as the input to a second track, and record the processed sound into the second track. That way you'll have rendered audio, but still have the original, unprocessed track if you change your mind.

I highly recommend buying a couple of cymbals, and overdubbing them . You don't have to be a fabulous drummer to hit a cymbal at the right time, and the difference in sound quality will cause many people to think you're using "real" drums.

Remember, an amp sim is a signal processor. So, the track itself will always be "clean" and unprocessed. Any change in tone occurs as you play back the clean sound through the plug-in. If you want to apply the plug-in sound to the track, select the track or the clips you want to process, then choose Process > Apply Effect > Audio Effects. Click OK, and the clip's waveform will now reflect the processing done by the plug-in. Hopefully this solves your issue but if not, I'll check back. Of course, you can also just leave the plug-in. However, apply the plug-in has practical advantages, because amp sim plug-ins tend to draw a fair amount of CPU power. Applying the plug-in to a track, then removing the plug-in, will save CPU power.

Can you elaborate a bit?