So What Happens Now !!!!

[T on Y]

Greetings...

So with the arrival of 'Next' & 'Sonar'  what will happen with CbyB

My understanding is that I will be able to continue to use CbyB as its already installed but say I get a new system will i be able to get access to the old CbyB installation files or is it at this point where a will have to look at paying for this software  ??

Thanks for any help . . .

[Alan Tubbs]

This topic has a huge, locked thread.  Read it and you’ll see there is no known answer until cake releases it.

[T on Y]

I skimmed through through the 32  page thread but gave up !!!

I guess as it stands the answer is .... "We don't know "..... Suck it and see

 

[T on Y]

That in itself is an answer so I'll take it

[Terry Kelley]

We waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt.

[Bass Guitar]

You are correct in the fact the information got totally buried in a 30 page thread which was locked I guess because people kept asking the same questions sort of like you are now. 

Here's what I gleaned from the mess. 

CbB has now been released as the final update that needs to be installed if you wish to continue using it until the final day it will work.

That day has not been set as of yet but we are told it will happen. All other older versions will not re activate so using those versions will result in the time out happening sooner for you. This is to give CbB users time to transition to either Sonar or Next. Or find another DAW. 

It has been said Sonar will be the continuation of Cakewalk and available in different packages at different price points.  Next is a new and much different DAW. 

At this point 'm waiting for the early access release of Sonar like most everyone else here. Once we have tested that they will probably move forward with it's official release and we will then, and only then know the pricing and terms of use. 

So myself I'm 100% fine with all this and it would seem I might even have almost a year??? to worry about it. CbB is working great and so music is made regardless. of what their plans are. Not my problem.  

[Will.]

CbB might get a last update to this release. It is in the 2023.09 release topic.

[Craig Anderton]

Free is always nice. But I suspect the new Sonar will be well worth what Cakewalk charges for it.

Just remember...with 2" tape, it cost $200 to record 30 minutes of 24-track music at 15 ips. We're getting off easy

[CSistine]

54 minutes ago, Craig Anderton said:

Free is always nice. But I suspect the new Sonar will be well worth what Cakewalk charges for it.

Just remember...with 2" tape, it cost $200 to record 30 minutes of 24-track music at 15 ips. We're getting off easy

The only difference with tapes was that you had almost no bugs and no software hassles (updates...). It was more straight forward.

Though I agree that it was really expensive and with less functionality! 😄

[Jimbo 88]

41 minutes ago, Sistine said:

The only difference with tapes was that you had almost no bugs and no software hassles (updates...). It was more straight forward.

Though I agree that it was really expensive and with less functionality! 😄

Not to be mean or make fun , but you obviously never worked 24 track.  Old Man Rant' a-commin'....Bleed thru, drop out, wow and flutter, aliasing, noise....just the start of the issues or "bugs" recording on tape.  Ohhh...make sure you store your 2 in tape "tails-out".  Ask the assistant who stored Led Zepplin's "Whole Lot Of Love" heads-out.

 

 

Edited October 13, 2023 by Jimbo 88

[Byron Dickens]

1 hour ago, Sistine said:

The only difference with tapes was that you had almost no bugs and no software hassles (updates...). It was more straight forward.

Though I agree that it was really expensive and with less functionality! 😄

You obviously were never there....

[Craig Anderton]

...and let's not forget rubber pinch roller and belt deterioration, azimuth alignment, head lapping, demagnetization, flaking oxide over time, having to redo bias and EQ adjustment every time you changed to a different reel of tape, and those hellishly expensive alignment tapes. And of course, replacing the capstan motor when you took variable speed down too far...not that I ever did that at Record Plant...it wasn't me. Really.

[CSistine]

Nonetheless the best recordings were made with tape and not with a computer IMHO!

[Bristol_Jonesey]

4 hours ago, Sistine said:

Nonetheless the best recordings were made with tape and not with a computer IMHO!

Debatable

[Bristol_Jonesey]

Laugh all you want, it's still debatable

[Michael Richards]

I agree. I think it is very debatable. There might be some pixie dust that gives tape a warmer sound, which is very pleasing to some people. Though, you can't deny the clarity in something like Blu-ray audio that was recorded in a digital studio, that probably still used analog outboard gear.

I think of it like gasoline vs. electric automobiles. You know which one is the future but you still have a passion for all the cool things a powerful gasoline engine gives you, like the sound of a Ferrari or a Porsche. I recently drove a Mustang Mach-E GT. I forgot about the sound after I became obsessed with pinning my head against the headrest. Wow, what a thrill. 

I don't know this for a fact except for my own home studio experience but I feel like every little mistake or note that is not played to perfection is duly noted in Cakewalk. My memory says that my recordings on tape seemed to hide slight imperfections.

I know tape and digital are different and totally feel digital is better but I love the passion that people have for tape. Not a bad thing to debate about.

[User 905133]

18 hours ago, Sistine said:

The only difference with tapes was that you had almost no bugs . . . . It was more straight forward.

Yup--using tape and tape decks never had any issues at all---NOT!!!!!!!

Should we start compiling a list of all the bugs inherent in using tape and tape decks? 

Sorry, but saying there were "almost no bugs" is just plain wrong. IMHO!

[John Vere]

This has turned into a Gear Space thread.  

[Craig Anderton]

1 hour ago, John Vere said:

This has turned into a Gear Space thread.  

Sorry, but it doesn't exceed that threshold until actual name-calling and fistfights break out.

[Craig Anderton]

But to get back to something that may be significant...the difference may not be as much about the medium, but the workflow. Tape required a certain way of working that's different from working with a DAW.

One person said he liked tape because rewinding gave him a chance to gather his thoughts before doing another take. I said "why don't you just wait a few seconds after hitting stop before hitting record?" He said it wasn't the same thing. As silly as that sounds on the surface, I understand there's a difference between a partnership with the tape where you're dependent on it doing something, versus just sitting around. There were many other workflow differences...with limited track counts, you couldn't do premixing...punching was more common than comping...you could tweak the EQ and bias for a particular sound...that sort of thing.

However, also consider that in big studios with 24-track 2", there was often a degree of camaraderie with the engineers, musicians working in other parts of the studio, etc. The social aspect may have had more influence on the music than the tape's distortion.