Xoo

Those are MIDI (velocity?) levels, so you need to split the simple instrument track(s) and show the TTS' audio track in the console.

Screen space?

Scroll-lock?

This is probably the iLok issue I've reported here and to Celemony (zero response). Even if Melodyne is serial number validated, unless you have iLok installed on your machine (it can be doing nothing apart from having the service running), the initial analysis is slow (it's a fixed 11 seconds overhead from memory - obviously it's sitting waiting for a timeout from the iLok driver before trying alternative methods - poor design IMHO).

Can you also not use an Articulation Map so it's clearer and you can create per FX/instrument ones?

It sounds like an accidental pre-fader send somewhere.

Don't forget noise and heat and power differences between HDD, SSD and NVMe drives.

Hybrid engine (or equivalent - it's called different things in different DAWs).

Fair enough - in the interests of science though... ? It's actually WaveRT, not WinRT.

My older MOTU doesn't like Wasapi exvlusive either unless I disable a setting in its control panel (Use winrt or similar?). See if that's there for you and if it makes a difference.

Workaround is available: change the number of tracks back to 1 before hitting go. It should probably offer the option for #MIDI and #Audio tracks (I'm not sure @John Vere is going to be always right in saying you want one MIDI track - you may want one per output).

I nearly suggested that too but wasn't sure if it would work as expected.

I *think* what he means is that he wants a pre-volume fader meter for the record meter, but one that is post gain. From memory, the record meter in CbB is pre-everything (which I think it should be given the digital nature of recording).

That changes the data. You need to add the FX to the track's FX bin.

SoundForge too of course.

You can buy it outright too - £18 annual or £27 purchase (other currencies are available :-)).

Thanks.

Removed as in uninstalled driver/unplugged?

And here's a good example of why the current system is no better than the previous one: it's a *stereo* input (or output) but now says 1+2, which is more confusing, potentially, for the new user who is most likely to have an interface (or onboard sound) with a single stereo I/O. Yes, the old way wasn't perfect, but the new is differently bad in my opinion. My own issue is that I have essentially fixed connections to an 10 in device (ignoring outputs for now*). They are labelled 1-8 on the hardware, but appear by default as stereo pairs in the hardware's software mixer - they can be split into mono. Now I have them connected so that 1 and 2 are mono, and 1+2 would never be used, as it's an illogical combination; all the others, I have as pairs (3+4, 5+6, 7+8 - 9+10 is SPDIF which I don't use), and the others are all used as stereo pairs, so mono for 3-8 are inputs I'd never select. Even with the pipe delimiting function (thanks for this!), there is no nice way to show this neatly in CbB that I can see. I *want* to see: 1 - Instrument 2 - Mic 3+4 - Synth 1** 5+6 - Synth 2 7+8 - Synth 3 What I actually end up seeing is either: 1: Instrument 2: Mic 1+2: Instrument + Mic 3: Synth 1 4: Synth 1 3+4: Synth 1 Or: 1: Instrument 2: Mic 1+2: Instrument + Mic 3: Synth 1 L 4: Synth 1 R 3+4: Synth 1 L + Synth 1 R Urgh. If the I/O were exploded completely and we could select and name at the mono or stereo level, I'd be more than happy (it would also make it less likely to select the wrong track input, which I'm sure we've all done, as we have fewer distinct options available), and I think it might also help address other people's issues that have been raised. * Interestingly the first pair of outputs is labelled L and R on the device, then the others are 1-8; CbB actually displays the second pair, by default, as 3+4: MOTU Audio ASIO Analog 1-2. Not confusing, no sirree. And none of the outputs are individually addressable, so are always stereo pairs in the MOTU software mixer, so having them appear as L/R as they did previously was more consistent with the hardware (obviously, this may be hardware/driver specific). As an aside, the inputs are also similarly named by default, so I have 3 inputs named <something> 1, but are named 1+2, 11+12 and 13+14 respectively by CbB! ** The names have been changed for simplicity. Question for anyone who has multiple interfaces of the same type running under the same (ASIO) driver: does CbB display the second devices ports (which would be labelled 1, 2, 3, 4 presumably on the hardware) as n+1, n+2, n+3 etc (where n is the number of ports on the device)? This seems...unhelpful if so.

I'll say thanks in advance too as I have a PCR sitting here too...

The phrase "whoopee-doddley-doo" springs to mind. The money might have been better spent educating people not to click on stupid email links...

Now try doing that with no recovery partition... In theory, it's doable but reality is a different matter!

Because (and this is purely me "arguing" from a logical perspective :-)), if moving the fader dirties the file (which it does and presumably we agree it should?), then having the fader moved by an envelope should also dirty the file. How the fader is moved is (essentially) irrelevant - it's the fact that it *has* moved which makes the file dirty. It's already a pain when a plug-in somehow dirties a file due to some LFO or similar it has running - having an envelope do it too would be horrific: "Should I save it because I changed something I want to keep, or has it changed because I played back but don't want to keep a change I made..?" - that's not a question I think we should be asking ourselves.

The real pain (I think) will be UEFI/secure boot. A lot of people, like me, will have gone with a CSM (compatability non-UEFI) boot for Windows 10 for a variety of reasons, even though I have firmware TPM 2.0 and possibility to use UEFI. Changing from CSM to UEFI boot is...well, let's be charitable and call it non-trivial. OK, it's a complete pain the backside without wiping your entire OS disk. Even the tools that claim to do it don't (I ended up having to boot to a command prompt and rebuild the partitions from scratch before I could restore from a Macrium backup - that's not fun). And if you dual boot (Linux/Windows 10, say), then good luck ?

If you keep the tight coupling, then playing back anything with an envelope would (logically) dirty the file. That is not helpful or, I would argue, what anyone would want. Decouple and this problem vanishes, and if you take my approach, you don't lose any functionality (to be fair, you may want to increase the range of the offset mode to compensate, although why anyone would want to add +6dB gain to a track is debatable :-)). 0dB (or equivalent - eg. center for pan) is the correct value to reset the control to - it's what is set when the track is inserted, so is the default; there's nothing else logical to use. I've been bitten by this "feature" numerous times and wondered what has happened to my track's volume. It's a bizarre way to have it work, as is, in my opinion.