marcL

A good (or bad) example are the new NI fx plugins. They surely use a new library (NI is always very fast in not supporting old systems!) and look how slow they are!

Dream on! It's the contrary, I can assure you that! ?

^^^this

That's what I doubt! It depends how you are developping, whether you always use the flavor of the month or you do serious and reliable work! Have you never wondered why some delopers (small teams) can still support even Windows XP? I tell you it's no wizardry! ?

This is also my experience and I think almost everyone on this forum should know my aversion to installer programs, those are often soooo stupid! If you want to install your NI libraries on more than one system, then it is 1000 times faster to copy them from your 1st system and activate them only with NA ("locate"). It is a pain that this is not possible for the other NI stuff! By the way, I regret that I upgraded my Komplete 11. The newer things I was interested in are mostly so resource hungry and slow that I probably will never use them. Else there are only Expansions and I am really not interested in them, they are almost useless for my kind of music. So the only thing that remains is probably Electric Sunburst. I hope it has some value for me! ?

If the new version runs now that slow like some of the newer NI FX/synths, then it is probably better not to update! ? I don't know what abysmal development tools nowadays developers use, but the trend could be seen even 20 years ago! To me it seems the users just have to buy new, more powerful hardware to compensate for inefficient code from development tools and philosophies! ?

I know, I know ... ! How many times did I buy a plugin/instrument only because it was on sale!! ?

I agree with you that my first issue may have to do with the +3dB thing! But my 2nd step when I copy (Ctrl + drag) the frozen audio to another track may have something to do with the OP's case!

Unfortunately, I don't know Project5 (I started with Sonar X3 Producer), thus I cannot comment on this! But I am sure that if the autorisation mechanism of Project5 was used, success would be possible! (sorry I could not resist!)

I really like what you're saying! I am also convinced it would be that way! Generally, IMO it is not a good idea to only copy concepts of competitors that have success. You have to have your own good ideas and concepts to have real success!

The only cases where I noticed such behavior was with instrument tracks (NOTE: interleave of the audio part set to mono). First, I adjusted the volume of the instrument to have a certain loudness. When done I could run it several times with about the same peak values. Then when I froze the instrument track the peaks were completely different! Copying the audio to another mono audio track changed the peak values again (not the same like in the beginning and not the same after the freeze!). Those things happened to me several times in different projects and there is no FX involved at all, but solely with mono tracks!

I just wonder whether the e602 II also sounds good on a guitar amp? On the basis of the frequency range it should handle that, as its range even goes higher (16 kHz) than the one of the e609. To cut a long story short, I want a dynamic microphone that can be used both on guitar and bass amps. Until now I have always used my C414B-ULS for recording amps, but it is so sensitive! ?

I am more interested in the E602 II for amp recording, because it can also be used for bass amps (20 Hz - 16 kHz), but YMMV!

Absolutely! ? But as with everything in this world nothing is just black and white! And this is exactly the problem with those acadamic simplifications used to design software and other things. Do you really want to say that the OP has just sung atonal noise? ? No, IMO Melodyne's algorithm to differ between noise and pitched content is just not perfect! I like Melodyne, it can do cool and astonishing things! But one can see clearly its limits regarding note starts (transients) and note pitches in more complicated vocals or in smearing polyphonic instrument sounds (not everything is just a simple piano). By the way, if you use several programs/plugins to detect transients of the same clip, then you will see quite different results (especially if not drums/percussion)! That's what I like in Reaper where you can configure the transient detection to accommodate your material!

Plus 25% tax here!

I am tired of hearing "corrupted project", "specific to the use/environment", "misunderstanding", "sending in project", ... ! ☹️ I have done this multiple times, most times without any effect. And e.g. the "Cakewalk prevent crossfading bug" (described above) is very easy to reproduce and I have reported it more than once in detail (I think once also with a project). ? But instead of doing pointless bug/problem reporting (that is disliked by some) to try to improve CbB, I think I'd better invest the time to learn another Daw (Reaper), what I have already started with! I think it is the best way to have a real solution for my quantization tasks (AudioSnap), lane clip edits, clip loudness envelopes ... without any quirks! If I am missing something else there (e.g. with MIDI), then I still can use Sonar/CbB for it. We'll see!

IMO this is another example of developer arrogance (my detection is always absolutely correct)! ? Most of the time I don't think it is a good idea to do any "intelligent" detection/automatism without the possibility for the user to adjust the results. Another example for this is transient detection in some DAWs, without correction possibility. CbB and Reaper are here some positive examples, because the user is able to adjust transients after detection.

Only God knows! ? I am in doubt about that! ? In any case, the bugs that I see, using edit features in take lanes, are surely no "pushing"! It is just simple editing. But I understand that a lot of people probably only record, enter MIDI data and mix with CbB.

This is not the first thing I am thingking of. It's more the edit bugs in take lanes that annoy me. So you can't change the gain of selected regions in some circumstances, in some cases there happen weird things with x-fades on clips that have been split and whose contents has been shifted separately, and so on ... This is the reason why I gave up to edit in lanes! Nowadays I always add a working track, move or copy the clips into it, do my edits in there and finally move the results back. But it is an elaborate way to work like that! ? IMHO this is also a thing that lacks any sense! There is another thing like that: If you split your takes all at the same positions, delete some of those (unusable) minor clips, then CbB prevents you x-fading at those positions where you still have clips on both sides!

This is also 100% my experience! I rarely have crashes, but the weirdness with editing especially in comp lanes drives me crazy! And there are some other great "old" features that would require some love (AudioSnap, DrumReplacer, ...). But it seems nowadays (redundant) new features have priority! Wise words! But it's not wise to criticise, I assume! More and more I understand one guy on the old forum called "Sharke". He brought up a lot of issues, but he was only demoralized by some fan boys and he was always requested to send in projects. Nothing happend! In the end he left for Studio One.

Crossed fingers, no more EQs! I even do not use all of the EQs I have (or did I mean compressors?)! ?

IMHO this is a completely wrong design in Windows (maybe in other OS too)! It is based on the opinion of a lot of developers and universities that as long as the interface is not changed new versions (of DLLs) can be installed without issue. In my experience there are often side effects that are not included in this design that can cause trouble (order of calls, data formats, ...). Thus I would prefer that each program, module could define the version of a DLL to be used (implies that several versions of the DLLs can run in parallel). So it would be up to the developer of the program to check whether a new version runs or not, or else it would run properly with an older version!

It sounds "Apple", I don't think Windows users profit by the updates (recurrent theme these days with software!). ☹️

This is something for youngsters! Can you imagine the weight? No definitely not for my back!

I am a bit confused by this statement! I have several of the folders that are originally located under "Cakewalk Content" put to another location and changed it accordingly in "Preferences > File > Folder Locations" and it seems to run correctly? Is it wrong what I am doing?