User 905133

AHA! Evidently you were pointing to the vertical meters.

I also did some additional fiddling with the Synth Rack and different insertion modes/property settings. Depending what the OP wants to do, choosing just the "First Synth . . . . " or "All Synth . . . . " output options (not split/simple/midi options) MIGHT be what the OP wants. When I chose just those options ^^^ and had an Audio Track highlighted/selected, clicking those those synths didn't move them away from the Audio Track of choice. HOWEVER, when I added a MIDI Track and pointed it to one of those soft synths, the solution falls into the 99% unwanted behavior category. Fun speculation, and I learned a lot more about options for using the Synth Rack. Still not sure what the OP's needs are and if any of this will help. Maybe we will get some clarity on this? Or maybe the devs have a crystal ball that is better than mine.

I listed both (instrument track or MIDI track) because I tested several things, including a hybrid instrument track, a split instrument track, and a midi source only track. (I think we are saying something similar, though). More problematic for me is that the OP has not stated what the goal is for clicking on the Synth Rack and what the workflow is that creates the 99% figure. For example, let's say the OP routinely (almost exclusively) uses non-hybrid instrument tracks and does some editing on the non-MIDI potion in the track view, but then clicks on and turns the knobs in an expanded Synth Rack.** When I did this, in 100% of my tests earlier, the associated MIDI track was selected in the track view. If that's what the OP does, I believe the OP is correct (the associated MIDI track gets selected and it is a workflow distraction) but just didn't explain the reason for the request. However, we just don't know the OP's workflow, if there is a better solution than clicking on the Synth Rack, etc. **By the way, if this is what the OP does, I would have suggested the option of using MIDI Learn to assign a knob, slider, etc. to control the virtual control in the Synth Rack. I didn't mention this earlier because the OP hasn't stated the reason for clicking on the Synth Rack and therefore might be totally irrelevant. Anyhow, since this is a feature request, I'm done trying to read the OP's mind.

At first I was wondering why the OP was clicking in the Synth Rack without wanting to have an associated track (instrument track or MIDI track) selected in the track view. So I played with the Synth Rack a bit in different ways than I usually use it. In at least 99% of the times I have used the Synth Rack, I don't have an issue with an associated track being selected, but workflows differ. It might be helpful if the OP gave more details on how the Synth Rack is being used (i.e., why click on it if you don't want to do something with the associated track?).

FAMOUS LAST WORDS, Or: Lessons from "Goodbye" threads: Lesson (from the OP of the above): Not only are they good reading, but maybe they should be required reading before someone posts an "I'm done with Cakewalk!!!!!" post. ?

I don't think it's an issue that Workspaces doesn't work. If the 90% figure is accurate, its more because (IMO): (1) Workspaces is amazingly powerful, (2) lots of people don't seem to have the time or patience required to understand even the basics of creating custom Workspaces (I don't mean doing minor tweaks to a factory Workspace), and (3) there are so many possible combinations and permutations it is impossible for mere mortals to fully master. I have chosen to create some personally very useful Workspaces probably with only about a 10 to 15% understanding (at most) of their potential uses. Many users (myself included) just want to go about making music, not learning how to create custom Workspaces. That's my excuse for staying at a "mere mortal" level of understanding. ?

Good point! Restarting/rebooting/etc. belongs in everyone's set of diagnostic steps if it isn't already!! Glad to hear its solved!

You raise an excellent point that ties in with some of my concerns about written documentation (and videos, too). To me, well designed text-based instructions are more accessible than most videos I have seen. Partly this has to do with my learning style. But I am not sure that all people who write manuals design them based on sound principles--esp. one that takes into account different learning styles. For example, some manuals (and online documentation) simply state what the different buttons, knobs, sections, etc. do. I suspect we have all seen these! But as far as I am concerned, the visual elements of the UI serve that function if they are not esoteric, obtuse, etc. I do not need to be told things like, "The button opens the XYZ dialog," or "Use this button to toggle the XYZ feature on and off." Many manuals (and other documentation) often do not go beyond basic descriptive characteristics of what I can see with my own eyes. I mention this particular issue, because it is part of the reason why I said that Chandler's videos match my learning style. Before there were videos I found I learned best from what some gear manuals present as "Instant Gratification:" a progressive set of hands-on mini tutorials--short series of steps to try and to learn with what elements on the gear (or in a UI) do what followed immediately by another short series of steps that build progressively on the preceding mini-tutorial. I find the videos I can relate to best are similar and allow me to do the hand-on thing either mentally or actually by pausing the video and rewinding a few seconds to make sure I did it right (kind of like re-reading the previous step in text-based "Instant Gratification" style mini-tutorials. Again, Chandler's videos work well for me because he helps me to learn how to do it by systematically trying out the steps. Another part is what you mention when you say you want to see more of the "why." I cannot learn by seeing or reading steps to follow. I need to see more of the causation that is happening. For me the causation is part of the "why." "How" to do something in its basic form is just a long list of steps to blindly follow. It is a chronological/sequential ordering of what to do and either implies or includes basic description of the elements, etc. Well designed "Instant Gratification" style mini-tutorials allow me as a reader to fill-in what's missing, to construct the why/causation on the fly. Once I have done that, I can read the rest of the details in the more dense sections of a manual because I have a personal sense of the manufacturer's modus operandi based on the hands-on exploration of what does what and why. But, there are many different paths to learning. Each of us is different, even if some of our learning preferences jive with those of others. JMO: It behooves each of us to understand the details of how we best learn. And I believe that creators of documentation and manuals really ought to take into account multiple learning styles. That being said, I suspect part of the appeal of Chandler's tutorials for me is that he seems to put into practice a long-held belief I've had: The best teachers are excellent learners, can effectively communicate to others their own learning methods, and can relate well to and implement multiple learning modalities. Thanks for allowing me the opportunity to set down in writing some observations I have had over the years.

Considering he had it available for free on his site and openly shared it for no charge, I assume his heirs wouldn't have an issue if you posted it. But I don't know for sure. Not sure if archive.org (the waybackmachine people) can link it into their site captures. They are a local phone call for you, aren't they? If you find out they can and are willing to do something like that, let me know. I have a ton of manuals and related docs for a particular manufacturer that have dead links on every site grab I have seen. Since I am an old man, and I doubt my kids would want to maintain my hosted repository, I have wondered if they could use the docs to fix all the broken links.

Yeah, I guess having a hardware MIDI thru connected or routed could be another cause. Based on the question asked "What did I accidentally activate?" and the OP's participation in the forum that leads me to believe he is not a novice, I assume (perhaps wrongly) the issue you added is not a likely problem. But maybe. @Johnbee58, please let us know what the cause was. @John Vere, since others have asked about doubled notes, if you haven't done so already, maybe this could go into a short video as part of a series on "Diagnostics" - different from your videos directed at beginners. PS: Or maybe another tutorial maker would want to do a series on "Diagnostics." I mentioned it to John, but I know there are other competent videographers who could do something like this as well. I just wanted to mention the idea since what we have in this thread seems (at least to me) suggests taking this approach with problems that repeatedly come up. Didn't mean to suggest John is the only one who could do it or that he should do it.

There can be many causes. The one I usually have is duplicate midi inputs selected, for example having both the usb and din ports coming from my keyboard selected. Since its easy to check, the first thing I'd look at are the midi input ports selected. Also, if using a plug-in that sends MIDI, double check that. But there can be other causes.

I haven't tried this myself, but here's a recent tutorial for MSpectralDynamics on getting rid of guitar noise and hum.

WRT to circuit design and short-cuts, I hear you!!! That's an awful lesson to have. ? Even though I haven't blown up any music gear, I triple check power supply needs (sometimes using a meter to check--just in case). As for the ART X-15, I still like to use a power supply consistent with the one I first used and and which worked for years even though the power requirements are the most generous I have ever seen: YUP!! ". . . just about any battery eliminator." But I am not going to try all the ones I have just to test it! Plus, in a pinch, I can power-up the ART SGX Nitro and use the 9 volt DC output jack, but my current interest is for controlling plug-ins and the SGX draws a bit more power than a wall-wart. BTW, I agree that the Fury 800 comes wonderfully close to the sound of the Korg Poly and EX 800. I used it with some patch files I had from my EX-800, but I have not yet converted some I have on tape. If others are interested in this and other free full bucket products, here's the link. I downloaded a few others I never had as hardware, and have confidence in them as plug-ins although I cannot compare them to the hardware originals.

Thanks for the question and for the answers!! I used to use my ART X-15 foot controller extensively with hardware and have been thinking of using it again (esp. with FX) now that I have been messing around with plug-ins. This discussion should save me from having to spend time figuring out how to do it. I still need to find which box has "the right wall-wart."

Fixed! ?

Based on the videos I have seen of both over the past few years, no. But he is a much better knob turner, button presser, and ribbon sliderer, his house band is better, he does decent Keith Emerson stylistic impersonations, and has better cut-ins of Sandra Bullocks (or whoever that is). Plus, they both play better than me and have more and/or better synths than me, so they both win! ? ?

This is purely subjective. You have absolutely no *****ing idea what my needs are and how the $100 interface meets my studio needs. ?

Thanks for clarifying. I am not familiar with the Soul Girl brand, but it looks like other generic, no-name brands I have heard others have problems with. If your QS8.2 is the 88-key weighted keyboard I saw online, it deserves something better than what might very well be "a piece of garbage." Did you get MIDI-OX yet? If so, use it with the MIDI interface cable. Does it show that data is indeed coming from and going to your PC? If it does, you might be able to use the cable until you get something more reliable. There are many options for bona fide din to usb midi interfaces from second hand ones that have usb drivers known to work with Windows 10 to new midi or midi+audio interfaces in various configurations. I only know what I have used. For example, I have several old E-Mu Xmid 2x2 boxes that still work even though they are legacy gear (i.e., abandoned by E-Mu). I believe those were going for $20 to $35 several years ago. I also picked up some used iConnectMIDI+ that even though they have been replaced by newer models still work. IIRC the 2 in 2 out box cost around $40 (plus shipping). The iConnectMIDI4+ cost around $100. I am not recommending these specific units, just giving you some ideas. Maybe the 1 in, 1 out interface cable you have will work, but it might be part of the problem--which can be determined with MIDI-OX. If MIDI-OX shows data come from the SQ8.2 and going into it you can then diagnose what's going on with Cakewalk. PS: My comments are consistent with bdickens and John Vere's comments (which came in while I was replying).

The picture of the back panel of the Alesis QS8.2 I found on the internet just show 5-pin DIN ports for MIDI In, Out, and Thru. I am assuming the "MIDI to USB adapter" is a 5-pin DIN MIDI to USB MIDI interface, possibly a cable. Since the quality and capabilities of those interface cable vary greatly (some 1 in, 1 out no-name interface cables are notoriously problematic), perhaps it might be helpful to specify what you have (not just "MIDI to USB adapter"). I once tested an iConnect mio, 1 in, 1 out interface cable for suitability doing sysex data exchanges with Casio CZ synths and a computer. DIN connectors on one end connected to the synth and a usb connector on the other end connected to a modern PC. It passed with flying colors. However, I have heard horror stories about other 1 in, 1 out cable interfaces. I agree with John that MIDI-OX is an excellent tool. However, calling the cable a "midi to USB cable" is troublesome. It leads people to think it changes midi data to usb data.

Based on some internet searching, it looks like it was courtesy of Ralf Sesseler. The wayback machine has several captures of his audio site: https://web.archive.org/web/20210418044221fw_/http://dis.sesseler.de/index.html . It seems that the file was not captured in any of them. ?

@Chandler Over the past several months I have also watch a number of your targeted tutorials showing how to design sounds. I find them very helpful--chock full of tips, nice step-by-step approach, etc. They greatly match my learning style. Thanks!!!

withdrawn