User 905133

When I started using the Custom Module, I stumbled onto a workaround using Workspaces--different sets of buttons based on different types of projects. Not disagreeing with you or @Lord Tim's suggestions immediately below; just mentioning one possible workaround until there is a change. Another option might be to have a Folders Module so that a button will call up a floating window of custom buttons (for example). WRT Workspaces, a while ago I explored micro changes using Workspaces. Based on my experience, it might be possible to have a Workspace that changes just the current set of custom buttons. Again, having a parameter that allows users to choose 9, 12, 15, 18 . . . n buttons sounds like a good idea to me and is probably easier and less confusing than using a Workspaces work-around. Lines as dividers, icons, category labels, etc. would work for me, too.

Are you talking about making the font(s) smaller? re-sizing the modules in the Control Bar? re-sizing windows/panes? resizing instrument and FX plug-ins?

I am familiar with chord tracks in hardware (e.g., sound modules) as implemented in what Roland called "Intelligent Arrangers" a few decades ago. I am not sure if the chord tracks in other DAWs have similar capabilities, but I can envision Cakewalk implementing them in such a way as to work together with and complement articulation maps, the arranger, and the inspector-based arpeggiator as well as 21st century functions (e.g., chord manipulation).

Are saying that the thread that you didn't start has been started by someone else and you would like people with knowledge of music theory to post comments about the Chord Track in the other thread?

I had this too for a few minutes. Seems OK now.

I wanted to change bus warnings (thank you for raising the issue and to scook for the solution) so I intuitively followed the correct procedures for adding a setting and setting a value. It agrees with what's listed at the Initilization File link above.

I looked a few months ago and couldn't find it either. I'd be very interested if it exists--either as an official document or a user contributed document.

You prefer Cakewalk right? I am not sure the intent of RBH's wordplay on "Cake" is clear. Sometimes the idiom "to take the cake" means something is bad.** However, in this case it means something good. RBH prefers it over Samplitude, Mix Buss, and Reaper. **See for example this.

And you are a _______ _______!!!!!!

(1) You have posited a number of erroneous assumptions. (2) Your rationale for having a feature request is based on a non sequitur (If we can do X in one place, we should be able to do Y in a different place). (3) What do you think the F stands for in RTFM? (Clue: See this. WARNING: The site linked here contains a swear word that some might find offensive. Please do not click on the link if you might be offended.) (4) Please go back to the basis for my original question: "It would also be consistent with how you can drag & drop a new instrument in the track view." Dragging and dropping a new instrument from the Browser [X] in the Track View [one place] doesn't always directly insert a new track. Your rationale for the feature request is based on this. I could be wrong, but I think you want to be able to drag and drop an FX plug-in from the Browser {Y] in the Console View [a different place] and in so doing directly insert a new buss. It was a simple question, asked respectfully, since your rationale is for consistency in workflows: It seemed to me that to have consistency, there could be an intermediary "Insert FX" dialog. It was really a simple question asked respectfully to which you replied, no, please re-read. I pointed out what I see as a logical inconsistency in your reply: I did not engage in name-calling [ad hominem] and I did not swear at you. (5) Don't confuse my willingness to explicitly reject your insulting and rude comments with pedantry. I would not otherwise have had the desire to reiterate all these details. As I said earlier: Really! It was a simple question, asked without any tinge of disrespect. You chose to just say no, re-read. I have now gone from "Sorry I asked" to "Sorry I asked and wasted my time and the time of anyone who spend any time reading any of this." Just to be clear, I have made no comments about the usefulness of your proposed feature.

I tried.

It sounds to me based on your reply that you think that everyone's workflow should be identical to everyone else's workflow, that everyone uses the program the same way that you do, and/or everyone should do things your way. If so, that is your choice, but I disagree. In fact one of the things that I have long appreciated about SONAR/Cakewalk is its extreme flexibility and customizability. Maybe you also agree that every feature available in one view should be available in every view. I don't know, because rather than responding to a reasonable request stated in a reasonable way you became insulting and swore at me.

Dude, I was just trying to understand your workflow. So I asked a respectful question in a respectful manner. Rather than respond with respect, you gave a terse and said to re-read the original post as if I would find something that addressed what I was asking about. I re-read it, still didn't find what I was addressing, and added but I didn't think it was worth discussing. When you replied with something non-responsive to what I was asking about, and had an if . . . then . . . statement, I simply pointed out that your logic was a nin-sequitur. You replied with name calling. If you want to continue the path from reasonable discussion to name calling, I will give that more thought--if you insist.

ad ho·mi·nem (adjective) - (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

Since you insist:

Some footnotes: (1) Not recommending Perfect Space over any of the others, but somehow I have the 32-bit version in Cakewalk. It works on my 64 bit PC. (2) If you like Melda's MConvolutionEZ reverb (free or licensed version), they have a Multi-Band version (paid): MConvolutionMB. Not saying these would meet your needs, just adding some information that I didn't see above in case it helps with you decision making.

I re-read as per your suggestion. I guess I don't see what you are proposing as being consistent with what happens within Cakewalk when I drag and drop a new instrument in the track view. UPDATE: But its really not worth any more time discussing. Sorry I asked.

Trying to understand the proposed workflow. So far as I can see, dropping and dragging an instrument from the Browser to an empty [non-track] area in the Track View opens up the Insert Soft Synth dialog. Are you also proposing an Insert FX dialog?

I just checked again (under Windows 10 v. 1903 and v. 2004): mouse-wheel scroll still works for loop packs, list, but not the filter. Not a problem for me as I have yet to use them, though I did download them and listened to a few.

The first thing that came to my mind when I read your query was the non-PRV method--which you mention: arm multiple midi tracks and record simultaneously. So, I am wondering: is your request is basically for a method that works in the PRV [i.e., the ability to arm multiple tracks] as opposed to drawing (so you don't have to use the track view)? For me, using a slider on a usb keyboard is drawing and is personally easier for me [i.e., greater control with less effort] than using a mouse (or a mod wheel, a knob, etc.). I don't use the PRV, but as more features are added [such as expression/articulation maps], I give it more thought as people mention workflows that use it. So I had no idea we couldn't do something like the above in the PRV. Thanks.

Just a guess, but if you had experience with either a hardware or software sampler plus experience with a hardware rompler it would be intuitive. Hardware ROMplers have samples encoded in ROM [Read Only Memory]. They cannot create samples. So called soft synth ROMplers cannot create samples either--just like hardware ROMplers.

Thanks for the clarification. The seemingly contradictory comments make sense now! Real instruments on recorded on audio tracks [external audio sources] v. audio from soft synths recorded either on (1) hybrid instrument tracks [midi + audio combined] or (2) audio tracks with a midi track pointing to an audio track [split instrument track].

Glad you got it, but I am curious to know about the above. To me, if you only want to record the controller (not specific sounds) you do not want to record audio.

Just sharing a work-around I am using for FX processing with Z3ta+ in a non-DAW host: I turn the oscillators to off. I like that "FX only" presets can be saved and recalled. Maybe this will meet your needs until someone suggests a better solution to using just the fx plug-in.

It looks like Bandlab Assistant successfully updated to 6.1.0.2587, but that doesn't seem to clear the Update button. I did restart Bandlab Assistant after I was sure it wasn't still in task manager; I did not restart my PC yet. Maybe that will clear the flag. Maybe there is a later/different build that clears the Update button. Will try the direct link. Plenty of options to try to clear the button. Not urgent on my part because Cakewalk seems to work as it did before the Quasi-Update. Update: Without rebooting the PC, I ran the installer again and the the button no longer says "Update." Hope this helps others with the same issue.