IgoRr

I’m sorry, I can’t find a way to change the in the tempo track of the curvature types between several already created nodes, is there some way to do this in bulk, and not one at a time? For example, there is an already edited envelope tempo in the project, but all types of curves are set to "jump", how to massively change them to "linear"? I tried to do it in the "Inspector" of the track's tempo, highlighting all the events, tried on all the keys and their combinations, but I did not find a single way to change the curvature types in bulk. Also, nowhere did I find the settings to set this curvature type in advance "by default". Thank you in advance for any hint if there is such a way!

I just created an empty project on purpose, added a Kontakt, loaded the same instrument that is on your screen, added the same controllers, saved the project, closed it, reopened it - everything remains as I set it up, the controllers are shown in the synth rack and all settings are saved. Check the settings in the "Insert Soft Synth Options" section (on the top bar on the left in Synth Rack, the rightmost icon or the "O" key), and in the settings window in the bottom right, activate the "Recall Assignable Controls" box, maybe you do not have this function activated.

Great results and numbers, congratulations! It’s even a little enviable, I have a more modest processor and less memory, and therefore, the loading of system resources is almost twice as high even in less heavy projects, but it’s also far from critical for continuing normal work. Congratulations again, our Cakewalk has always been a great program and has gotten even better in last years!

For many years, this feature has been configured in Windows Settings under Energy Options. There are 3 different "energy plans" where all the smallest options are configured to turn off the monitor, hard drives, protective screen, "sleep mode" and other services in the computer, I don’t really understand, why you need to insert such options into separate programs? This is for the completely lazy ones who have never configured and do not configure the system after a clean installation. Practical experience taught me this, when in the middle of some work, the archive hard drive suddenly turned off, since then, the first thing I do is set up the "Energy Options" section, it takes 5 minutes, there are much more settings and acts directly on the system itself, without the need to configure individual programs.

This problem looks very strange, given that the MIDI system itself is universal, and is not tied to any specific engines of specific companies, it seems to me that this Thomas is a little disingenuous, announcing the "end of support for Cakewalk". But even if we assume that this is the reason, we can only hope that the developers from Bandlab will try to fix this problem themselves in the near future. Although, in the last few years, the leading competitors have clearly seen the displacement of Cakewalk from the media space by all available means, including the failure to provide support for Cakewalk by leading plug-in and other instruments manufacturers.

@Noel Borthwick Is it normal that the "Assistant" cannot be moved anywhere from the center of the screen? I remember that before a certain version, its window was completely controllable, and now it's not very convenient. I have windows 8.1 pro x64. Thanks!

A little different: Cakewalk was shelved not because of its instability, but because of the sluggishness of the guys from Boston, who, at a key point, could not (or did not want to) agree with Steinberg in terms of using ASIO. And while Cakewalk was looking for its analogue of this driver for 10 years (!!!), most of the dedicated Cakewalk users and some professional studios switched to MAC. Sometimes this is how you can literally break the course of History.

@Lord Tim In today's world, where literally everything is based on profit, the number of users has little effect. And the examples I have given above confirm the tendency to squeeze out Cakewalk from this media environment. I partly agree that Bandlab does not introduce amenities for beatmakers and hip-hop lovers, but Steinberg or Logic Pro do not do this either, nevertheless, their popularity and authority in the professional environment is only growing. I'm not exaggerating, I remember very well that 6-8 years ago, Cubase or Logic Pro were first of all compared only with Sonar, and now Cakewalk is practically not mentioned, except by individual enthusiasts. But from every iron you hear about Studio One or Reaper. And I repeat once again: now Cakewalk is in the best shape for all the years of its existence, it has much more creative tools, it has become much more convenient, but it is less and less in a professional environment, as long as it rests on the pure enthusiasm of users.

@Asato Maa Not a bad idea... in theory! Although, looking at what is happening in the music production environment, it seems to me that it will not be possible to save Cakewalk. The reason is very simple - at the present time, the fate and popularity of any program depends not on the number of subscribers in social media, and not even on the number of users, but on the commercial position for this program on the part of plug-in manufacturers or tools for it. And in this matter, from the moment, when Bandlab decided to make Cakewalk free, it began to be openly squeezed out of the market by its main competitors. The most important examples are - Audiobro, Cinematic Studio, Native Instruments and some others, which fundamentally do not apply "integration into DAW" in relation to Cakewalk. Over the past 3 years, our beloved DAW has completely disappeared from the list of "best music production software", while Cakewalk remains in the spotlight only thanks to private enthusiasts who dedicate their reviews to it. I already know quite a few professionals who, after 20 years of working with Cakewalk, are now switching to Cubase or Logic Pro, although right now Cakewalk is in the best shape ever. Unfortunately, the commercial policy of Bandlab does not depend on our opinions and will not change, which will inevitably lead to a complete drop in user interest and Bandlab's refusal to continue working on it.

@Jason Halogen This has never happened to me and never happens, although my keyboard is different. But I'm pretty sure your problem is that you've set the wrong MIDI input parameters on the tracks. You need to select for ALL tracks "Oxygen 88 Omni", almost completely sure that your problem will be solved. In addition, you should definitely arrange the outputs in all MIDI channels on each track by ascending numbers, because of this, confusion can also occur.

How can you work with individual notes/fragments of a track using a primitive quantize block in Inspector? Besides the fact that the Inspector contains only INPUT quantize, it can also be applied only to the selected clip as a whole. I specifically explained: it would be much more convenient to have such an open (NOT a drop-down menu) module in the Piano Roll, so that you can select the desired notes or fragments, and be able to control the quantize parameters when PLAYING the project.

In general, yes, but the most convenient and logical place for such a block - is the Piano roll, where you can select the necessary notes or fragments, it seems to me. And precisely not in the form of some additional plug-in or plug-in module, but as a part of Cakewalk itself.

For many years I have been working at DAW from the Cakewalk company, and all these years I think that our program is missing a small Quantize pane in the Piano Roll. This could have been the controls for coantise and swing right during the playback of the fragment. It might look like a panel from Logic Pro X, although there is something similar in Cubase. Personally, I like the Logic Pro X version more and it seems convenient, although the Cakewalk team can certainly make their version no worse. Thanks in advance! I attach the screen.

The issue of working with a computer (in general) is not limited only to the speed of system loading, but also to the amount of free space on the system disk after installing the System (Windows) and all (!!!) programs that you use. This is important for the system to create a RAM-based virtual memory buffer. You can, of course, somehow work on a 128 GB disk, but practice has shown that this is enough only for the correct operation of Windows itself, and a set of utility programs that are not very heavy. To work with heavy and advanced multimedia programs, the manufacturers themselves indicate the minimum and recommended requisits, you yourself brought them. And this is done on the basis of their own measurements and checks. In my experience, the minimum sufficient storage capacity of the SSD for stable reliable work with music programs should be at least 250 GB. I have a system and the first "working" volume - type NVMe, this is generally the best solution for this type of work. But for portable programs, or for libraries from virtual instruments (Kontakt etc.), for folders with projects and audio-video material, any other disk or the creation of sim-links is quite suitable.

@murat k. I do not insist on my opinion, but personally it seems to me that you are over complicating the task of structuring plugins. There is no need to sort them on two levels (subfolders), if it can be organized much faster at one level in the Browser, and it will be no less intuitive and convenient. Human perception reacts much faster to objects accessible to the eye, than to those closed in folders, which directly affects the speed of searching and choosing plug-ins, this has been verified by many years of working with different programs. Quite a long time ago, a tendency has appeared for most software manufacturers to put everything in subfolders, which noticeably lengthened the search for objects, compared to the open list. And according to your method, at first a lot of time is spent on organizing, and then time is again wasted on searching and opening subfolders. Of course, this is a matter of habit, but from a rational point of view, this is not justified in practice.

@murat k. You have nothing to answer? I have more than two plugins selected on the right-most side (layouts), so what exactly " it's not"?

@murat k. What exactly "it's not"?

@Daniel Russell You definitely have something wrong in your system, on my right side of the Plugin Manager you can select at least all the plugins from the first to the last. And it has always been that way, even in older versions of Sonar. Look for the reason in your system, the Plug-in Manager itself is working completely normally.

@msmcleod @Mark MoreThan-Shaw I must apologize for persisting so. For many years ago, I tried to group audio tracks, and I could not do it the way it is implemented in Cubase, that's why I gave this example. But the fault is entirely my own - I tried to create AUX Track from the Sends field, and it turned out quite differently, as I spoke about here earlier. And only yesterday I saw the post of @msmcleod that this is being done from the Output field, and indeed, everything turns out in the best way, as I dreamed all this time. Once again, I apologize, and express my deep gratitude for your time and desire to help! Only thanks to this, I can finally use the grouping of tracks, implemented no worse than in Cubase, which I do not like. THANKS a thousand more times! ✌️ ?

@msmcleod My AUX track differs in routing in pre/post fader modes then Audio track, or is something just not working for me? That is why, I also proposed to create something similar to the grouping procedure as in Cubase. And still, in Cakewalk, to get a fully formed grouping of tracks, you need more actions than in Cubase, and you have to scale the tracks to access the "output" field, unlike Cubase, I described this in great detail. But if you do not find such a function (option) convenient, then you do not want to add it, I can only regret it.

@Bill Phillips Are the concepts "track" and "bus" the same for you? And why in all (!!!) DAWs tracks and buses are separated into different sections? I will describe for you the number of actions for the fastest way to group multiple tracks in Cakewalk: 1. Open the Console. * 2. Select the required tracks. 3. Hover the cursor over the "Exit" field and then "Send to... new patch point (for example). ** 4. Create a new audio (aux) track. 5. Rename (name) the new patch point. 6. Assign inputs to this track from the created patch point. * If you do all these operations in the "Tracks" mode, the necessary tracks will have to be scaled to open the "output" field, therefore, it is more convenient to do this from the console. ** If you send the outputs to the aux track initially, then the routing control of audio streams in the pre/post fader modes differs from the audio track. If you send the selected tracks to a new BUS, it will be in a different section, and not in the "Tracks" section, which is not so convenient in work, I talked about this earlier. In Cubase, this whole operation is performed like this: 1. Select the required tracks. 2. In opened options window - name the group track (optional!) 'designate "stereo" or "mono" mode' . 3. Press "ok". I will add that in Cubase it can be done from the "tracks" mode even with completely closed tracks, and in just 3 actions, after which NO ANY action is required at all, isn't it more convenient? And this group track remains in the "Tracks" section. I do not work in Cubase, everything is much more complicated there and in general, it is not so convenient and slower to work in it. But there are several functions that are perfectly implemented there, one of them is the creation of group tracks, so it seems to me that my beloved Cakewalk would become even more convenient with such a function.

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw I was not mistaken, for you it all comes down to the price and the number of monitors. I wasted a lot of time explaining simple things to a person who doesn't even think about such concepts.

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw That's what I was talking about - you absolutely (!!!) did not understand what I was proposing and why. Are you unfamiliar with the concepts of "simplify, speed up, make more convenient"? Or does it all come down to the number and price of monitors?

@Mark MoreThan-Shaw I have a luxurious 32-inch Samsung monitor with 3840x2160 pixels, which is more than enough for MY work. And my suggestion here was not to hear the advice "buy another monitor", but to try to make my favorite program even better and more convenient.

@Light Grenade This is unbelievable ... I am Russian, and I do not speak English, maybe that is why you are not able to understand that I want to SIMPLYFICATE grouping tracks. I know all the current ways to do this, but they all involve a COMPLICATION and take a lot of time. In addition, I / O routing is noticeably more complex than it would be if there was such an option as in Cubase. Can you add such a function to Cakewalk? If not, why are you proving something to me, if I have known all this for many decades?