David Baay

I would wager the timeout period is determined by the activation server so it can't be hacked on the client side. Versions available when the timeout was longer used a different activation architecture and server and can't activate against the current server at all. That's why an update was forced in the first place.

CW developers have historically avoided the use of warning pop-ups to save you from yourself, and rightly so in my opinion. My suggestions: - Get in the habit of hitting Ctrl+Shift+A to deselect everything before bouncing/exporting an entire project. - Use the Project Start and End markers to define the default range. - Instead of going straight to export, bounce the Master bus to a 'Master Bounce' track that outputs directly to Main Outs in parallel with the Master bus. Group that track's mute button in opposition with the Master bus so you can A/B between the live and bounced mixes. When you're satisfied that they sound the same, export the Master Bounce track in the desired format.

Click elipsis in the upper right corner of your initial post and choose Edit. You can place your cursor in the title to edit it as well as the body. It;s customary to just add SOLVED! to the start of the existing title. I would also suggest you link Noel's post from page 3 and/or the download link for his VC Redist repair tool.

Should not be necessary to reinstall, just run the VC Redist repair tool.

I repeat:

Try the new VC Redist repair tool:

Good point. The one time I had realy chronic and mysterious crashing turned out to be due to bad RAM, verified by Memtest. And other apps were not affected; only SONAR was using RAM extensively enough to hit the bad blocks. But it seems the OP has disappeared...?

The region muting is due to the 'Mute Previous Takes' option being enabled for Punch recording. As Mark pointed out, it can be un-muted by sweeping in the top half of the clip with the Mute tool.

This doesn't make complete sense. The Quantum should be ouputting directly to and external amplifier or powered monitors; your onboard sound should not be involved. This is also oddly stated. It should the Output of the Master bus that's assigned to the Quantum's main outs, not a Send. That said, a Send would work. Are the meters on the master bus showing activity?

Understood. I often do that, and sometime regret it when someone later posts that I overlooked something. ;^)

FWIW, I don't see that here with a wireless Logitech mouse using its proprietary dongle. Maybe depends what you're hovering over in the TV...? Othewise could totally be hardware/firmware/driver-specifiic.

That all works for me, but because it's a "Selection Group", you have to select the group to have the edits apply to the group. This is actually handy because it allows you to still make individual edits to unselected clips in the group or to deselect a subset of the group without having to jump through hoops.

a.k.a. "new code". In an application as complex asa DAW, even the best coders will occasionally produce problematic code that fails to anticipate some use case or set of conditions that leads to bad/unexpected behavior and even the best beta-testing process can miss things. The point is simply that all code changes are potential sources of regression and instability. Obviously there's no avoiding this if the software is to be enhanced, and some changes are riskier than others. In this particular case, I would say the risk is relatively low except that adding new tracks is one of the most fundamental and frequently-used functions in a DAW so any breakage would have a big impact. In any case, I never expressed any particular objection to it; I simply suggested that track templates largely address the need. IIRC, the old forum did have a voting system for feature requests. Here, the 'Like' option should suffice. But the level of participation in the forum these days is so low, I'm not sure how useful any voting system would be.

Seriously? Where do you suppose bugs/instability come from if not from adding new code/features?

Shouldn't you be posting this on Microsoft's forum since a Windows Update precipitated this? That's a lot of vitriol for someone who has apparenly only found it necessary to come to the forum with a problem once in years of using CW. In any case, it seems you missed this post about CW's fix for Microsoft's blunder: