Will.

As I've said before! Thats because "0" is 1 and "1" is "0" a 24hr clock ends at 00:00 and starts at 1:00. Where the last count of 12 is at 00:59 "AKA" the start of "1." The fact that you make an example of an Olympic clock is disappointing, because although it DISPLAY "00:00:00" the count starts at "1" That is why "0" represents the number "10" on the abacus. Because the count just starts back at 1 again - which then gives you "11." and every time as you go higher 21; 31 etc. I can go on all day with this to why it will never work. Unless you want to read the music score wrong.

Yes. But it's time based - as in reality, "real-life." Meaning 0 is 1 | and | 1 is 0 - so this tells you that between the "0" and 1 is a negative count. It's the law of time. We don't start to count at "0" we start by 1. Your house clock starts at 1:00 not at 12:00 because 12 ends at the beginning of 1:00 O'Clock (exactly like your metronome counts.) So you see why "0" can't be added to the score as this will add a negative clock count? That is why they teach you this in music schools (Not that i've been to one.) So all this comes down to a count-in at the end of the day. It is what you're basically asking, but not in so many words. FWIW: The metronome count-in does not only applies for recording it's playback. That's why your loop points keep your time and song length in order. And like I said: I totally understand what your asking. But do you see the complications? Yes, we all want a way to have that silent free count to make up for starting times for rendering purposes, but this why it cant be done. That's why the only way is to draw it in yourself once production is finished. Isn't there an easier way with the arranger?

We just drag out/in silent spaces and add in fades to prevent clipping.

What you want to do then - is to change your metronome count-in to 1 measure or 4 - beats in the drop down menu seen below. This will give you a pause of 1 measure (Bar) count before the actual recording starts. It is a global tradition in music and video for the timeline to start at 1. This has been the law since the beginning of music. Reason for this is: Every count starts at 1 and return back to 1 count. Whether that's in triplets or dotted - and its just mathematical correct for 4 measures (Bars) to end at the 4th measure before you get the 5th measure (Bar.) This rule cant be changed as it agrees with "time" in general. Meaning: The 1 you see in the timeline (irrespective of what clock method or counts you use) those beats in between a measure - counts down the seconds. Again: Time in general. Thats why a 1/2 note is 1 second and a whole note count/measure/bar is 2 seconds long. It's the principle and law of time itself to have it immediately start at 1. I totally get what you're saying and asking - I get it and understand it. That's why a count-down | or | count-in, are so important in music applications on recording. Who knows maybe it is possible to make a visual aspect of it - like a blank count-in area on the time ruler. I wouldn't know. Cheers ✌

All good here. ☺

@Jim Fogle It sounds robotic and it adds glitches when transient gets moved ever so slightly. That's what I meant.

Dude. When someone say's something is broken - that means its broken. It does not work. What else is there in it? It doesn't retain its information as it suppose too. The original post explains it clear enough.

Only in Cakewalk, yes. I have had the privilege to work with it in various other daws - and it works as expected and perfectly in them. Reaper? OMG! Smooth! Best one by far is FL. Obviously PT too.

Did you read the original post? It has been broken for years in cakewalk. Cakewalk is problem the only DAW where this doesn't work correctly or not as advanced as other DAWs. Hack even Audacity's Audio Snap and stretch mode works better. minor tweaks in cakewalk and It sounds robotic and stretched out. You can be the best guitarist or drummer, there's always transients you want to tighten more, to have things sound more tighter. This is especially important with a live performance project on client requests. A good example for you to understand what im saying is - would be to use a vocal piece and move it's transient to hear what we're talking about here. This goes for hats, snares too.

I still think cakewalk need to get this to be independent and not dependent on playing it live (if that make sense.) What I mean by this is: Let us do this in the daw as well with the piano roll. (Vitually too) like how FL and Logic does this. Unless i'm missing the boat, but for years I've been physically playing it in with the vocal.

Agree 100% with you.

All you gona get is a "TURN it OFF." So you might get an answer in these topics Click here

Yeah. Faulty cable was the first thing that came to mind here too.

One of the many reasons I didn't respond.

I do the exact workflow. But what's the use having a tool that is broken with advance features we can't use? Cut and nudging the information in time doesn't always work that great, cause now we have to do fades in and dout which also adds to the problem sometimes - like ending the tail to quickly on short notes.

Can we fix Audio Snap? What's the purpose of working with Transient Makers? To move the information rather than stretching it right? So why is cakewalk stretching the note instead of moving it leaving you ending up with broken information. The besst work around is the old cut and nudge feature to avoid those robotic and glitches you end up with. Its almost like it slows the note down into low bit information. Audio Snap and Time stretch should not be one feature. ? Cakewalk forces one to record drums or guitars (sometimes guitars) in a different DAW. ? Luckily FL Studio is fully functional in trial mode except "SAVING" the project, but we're not suppose to run to another DAW for a simple task as this.

Oh yeah! Your trial license must have expired.

Indeed. This is a common problem in production. Let's hope for the best. ?

Can we have the ability to replace audio sample with different samples without having to rebuild what you have. Example: If I want to replace a Clap with a Snare - i only want to be able to drag the snare on the track number, to replace the entire clap loop I had created before it was bounced into/as one clip in the track view. "Replace old with new" doesn't/never seem to work. It rather go sit on top of the previous/current sample.

Just click on the audio clip to highlight it, loop the region (Shift+L) - press Ctrl+M and sit back.

Yes. You do it like this - as i have explained above. Velocity_1.mp4

I don't think It will. There's a question I've start asking these youngsters lately and it boggles my mind. So just out of curiosity i've been asking the millennials why they prefer Logic over PT. Craziest answer all the time - Logic looks better than ProTools. Apparently DAW appearanceis a thing too with them. Luckily only 1 told me Cakewalk looks dumb - sjoe! For real the answer with that question is always that PT looks out dated. Maybe you should ask your students about this between the appearance of your favourite DAWS which would they prefer using.

By default: Left click on the mouse while hovering over the marker and holding the button in - press delete. By default "Q" is for quantization. Cakewalk has it own shortcut keybinding options by default for decades now like many other DAWs. We just need to learn them overtime.

Yes you can. I'm nowhere near my home studio to attach screenshots. At the bottom left corner when in the Piano roll view - there's a little button to the control panel that looks like an eject button. Click it one's to mix it in with the notes or twice to have it separate. Also keep in mind. It's not the volume that you're changing - its the velocity of the notes (how fast the notes was hit.) Having the volume at random levels: This give you a humanized feeling to the track, which is what you always want, even in EDM. Click here to learn the Piano Roll View

Basically yes. If you bring "clipping" into that equation? let it work as a true gain reduction meter - for that purpose? Don't know. Although my explanation here are moving slightly back to compression. ? You get the idea right? As an indication for overall channel gain reduction.