User 905133

As a user (not staff or even a power user) and on the outside chance that my experience yesterday might help one or two cases of noise/distortion, I add my experiences from yesterday:

Try this: Track View > Options > Click Behavior > Transport Seeking Stops Behavior See previous discussion here.

Officially, the bug (now fixed in 2019.11 build 54) is named "MultiDock draws unexpectedly after being minimized then closed." Thanks to the development team for reproducing and fixing this rather obscure problem!!

Last Friday I test drove the "Get Started" initial configuration wizard and made many glowingly positive observations I had been planning to write up. With the pending non-early release, I just wanted to get this out sooner rather than later. I had been planning to try to track down a consistent method for triggering a unhandled exception error (c0000005). It is entirely possible it is related to my specific ancient PCI sound card which I don't think anyone else uses any more. I think the UI/audio/MIDI device configuration wizard should help reduce initial setup issues newcomers to CbB (beginners and those more familiar with other software) sometimes experience and have written about. (Kudos to the team for designing and implementing the wizard and being responsive to comments posted in the forum.) I really like that when users select a starter Workspace, the Control Bar gives them a taste of what it will look like. Probably not an issue with newcomers: Undocked/Floating Control Bars [Workspaces]. Clearly the wizard is designed for new users, so this might not affect any new users; but, when a floating/undocked Control Bar blocked (in front of) the wizard, it puzzled me until I could figure out I could move the wizard and/or make it appear in front of the Control Bar as a sample of lens/workspace. (I haven't tested this with newly created workspaces; not sure if there would be a difference.) Nevertheless, having the Control Bar show up is quite convenient for sorting through previously created test Lenses. IIRC the c0000005 unhandled exception error came about initially and later with experimentation when testing non-ASIO modes, before I realized the icon on the audio I/O page would allow me to choose more than one default I and one default O. (Please note on my tower I almost always use ASIO mode so I am not asking for suggestions about this. I felt bad that I didn't report a prior "forced" theme in the basic lens one of the releases ago and am just writing this up in case this turns out to be an issue worth correcting.) IIRC, at one point, I was able to select my Sound Card as I suspect Windows saw it and my on-board Realtek chip-as-sound card. I think the c0000005 error was triggered when I went to switch/add Audio I/O ports from Preferences[P] (MME mode). Sometimes I would get an Audio Driver Error warning. I believe this prevented the crash. Sometimes it crashed. I suspect it might be "user error" that the wizard/Preferences[P] didn't catch. You can't make it 100% "idiot proof," but in case there is an issue, I am attaching my running all-in-one set of screen shots from last Friday. BTW, I did not yet clear/rename AUD.INI to see if that would eliminate the issue. Also, I started to test different audio/driver modes, but never made the time to get back to the issue. Very minor suggestions: Could (1) the wizard box be resizable and/or (2) the audio and midi device lists be scrollable with a mouse wheel? Also, in the wizard and Preferences can there be a "Deselect all" option for audio ports and for midi devices (certainly not a "Select all" option)? Again, Kudos to the team for the Get Started configuration wizard!!!!!

I hope that if they do update the rgc/z3ta+/DimPro/RapPro line they include the ability to funnel audio from other sources through the FX (like z3ta+ 1.5) .

Why not just create your own file with religious quotations, anarchistic quotations, riddles, anything?

I agree your advice is more accurate to simulate actual performances.

Can you use flac files instead of wave files for your purposes? If so, tags can be edited from the CbB Media Browser using MS's Properties > Details. Just a thought.

Thanks for the explanation of possible switching improvement (smoother/faster). That makes sense! I will give more thought to the second point to see if I can reconcile (and perhaps better explain) what I had been thinking with your comment.

Not sure if my suggestion for "Workflow Preferences" as a option for Lenses [now Workspaces] was considered as it was not a formal request, but a discussion embedded in a problem-solution type thread. If it had been considered and either dismissed or shelved, that's fine. If it hadn't, here's a new problem-solution thread that points to how workflow preferences that are scattered in different places could be aggregated via Workspaces. (BTW, I prefer "Workspaces" to "Lenses"--it seems a more descriptive name--at least to me. ) Thanks for all the fixes, improvements, etc. Oh--I have been going through my custom "Lenses" and they all seem to work just fine as "Workspaces." In fact, it might be my imagination, but I think they switch in more smoothly/faster.

TY for this recent line of discussion. Since the X Series, I had never before stumbled onto the Event Filter and had been missing it. Also, after searching "inline" in the current reference guide and bouncing between the guide and a recent tune, I found a chain nested of menus/submenus that enabled me to make the inline piano roll view acessible via double clicking behavior. I did not know about this specific personal workflow preference (perhaps because it is somewhat "hidden"), but retrospectively it is the kind of workflow preference I had in mind a month or so ago when I suggested a new category ("workflow preferences," I think I called it for Lenses [soon-to-be Workspaces]). So, thanks for pointing out these features!

Another option if you save your exported audio so you can find it in Cakewalk's Media Browser: right-click tune, select properties, choose details, edit fields, click OK.

I only tested "Fit-to-Time" once. Does that do what you want? Update: For a second round of tests (single 2' 47" audio track rendered from a midi soft synth project), I ran into an upper limit of 400% stretch and lower limit of 25% shrinkage. One test converted a 44 sec slice (Start -> Thru) and made it 30 seconds. Forgot to mention: I didn't see a way to do an instant preview; audio conversion took time to do. Update 2: Took the same 44 second slice and made it 60 seconds. Again, if there's a way to preview it, I didn't see it. Had to wait until the "Processing audio data" gauge finished. Footnote: On my 1st attempt with the 2' 47" track, I accidentally entered 1 hour as the target length. That's how I saw the 400% max. The track did expand to exactly 1 hour; however, the actual audio "only" expanded to 400% of the original. The rest was silence.

Not sure why I don't. (Just sharing this here to say its not everyone; I have no idea why. Could be any of a number of reasons. Probably not worth trying to determine.)

The subject of musical meaning and the composer's intentions in communicating meaning through music is a passion for me. In terms of historical writings and research from many particular perspectives, there is a lot out there (in many diverse fields of interest). Perhaps you are already familiar with some of what's out there. If not, and if you are interested in these topics for more than a casual discussion, I would encourage you to continue to explore the subject with a passion. As for me, some of "the literature" looks for meaning within music (from (a) microscopic to (b) macroscopic perspectives; for example from (a) the alleged meaning in intervals, frequency ratios, timbre, harmonics, etc. (microscopic) to (b ) meaning as based on or derived from large-scale things, such as culture, medium of communication, broad contexts, etc. (macroscopic) For me (and I recognize everyone is different and has different thoughts on any given subject), meaning is something that humans (as individuals and groups of individuals from like-minded, relatively homogeneous groups--such as interest groups and "sub-cultures" to diverse, heterogeneous groups--such as "society") ascribe to different aspects of experience. For example, people who like certain types/genres of music (traditional electronic music, ambient music, orchestral music, video game music, acid rock, etc.) might have a wider variety of experiences with regard to those favored genres and therefore a wider range of "meanings" (from descriptive/denotative meaning to evaluative/connotative meaning) than people who are unfamiliar with (or who dislike) those genres. Someone who thinks of "electronic music" as dance music might hear "Poème électronique" and find "no meaning" in it (or maybe think its "just a bunch of sounds strung together," but certainly not "electronic music." On the other hand, someone else with a background in "traditional electronic music" might hear different pieces of dance-oriented "electronic music" and think "It's all the same." I think your observations about comparing different versions of musical elements (such as reversing the order of notes, reversing a performance, etc.) and your speculations about the change in meaning based on the alterations are interesting. I am not sure this is a good forum for a "philosophical discussion" of this topic. I chose to share some thoughts here since (1) you seem interested in the broader subject, (2) others might also be interested, (3) you seem to be leaning in the direction of meaning as being ascribed to music as opposed to meaning being inherent in music and the distinction might be of use in sorting through "the literature" if you (or others) are interested, etc. Just some "food for thought" depending on your personal dietary preferences (a la what's music to someone might be "just noise" to someone else).

I explored Ctrlr a while ago, but decided I didn't want to invest the time to develop fluency with all the programming needed to build complex two-way panels (both to gear and from gear). It was fairly easy to develop a one-way panel with buttons and sliders to control a few features of my E-Mu ROMplers. I never thought about it before, but it is a bit like a studioware panel. I used it in realtime, not with Cakewalk. From the panels I see posted there, it looks like users have been developing some sophisticated panels, some that even have skins that mimic gear!!! It might be good to know if those panels could be used efficiently to interface with Cakewalk. Just a thought in case anyone is interested.

I have worked with the text colors for midi, synth, and instrument names in the track view and in the console view. I have not tweaked any background colors, yet. You might want to look at the ones under "background." I have some sample track name colors. I will see if I can change some backgrounds, too. It is something I have been wanting to try! UPDATE 1: I cannot get the background colors to change. I will try again later. UPDATE 2: Got it! See Focused and Unfocused Track Background Colors.

I agree!! Perhaps like Themes, users could make Lenses/Workspaces (from basic to complex), with sample screenshots and descriptions so other users can just drop the *.lns file (or whatever the extension will be for Workspaces) into the user Lens/Workspace folder. However, mastering lenses/workspaces is not a simple task and I believe it is asking too much to expect new users to learn how to create customized/simple UIs when trying to wrap their heads around Cakewalk basics. The basic lens/workspace is one option; I am suggesting that perhaps other users (more experienced with lens/workspace design) can offer a wider range of basic and advanced options with a screenshot so users can see what they look like before trying them.

offensive alternative removed

In case it is still not clear, I was not asking for the ability to "Insert from Bus Template" or suggesting that being able to right click in the bus pane area would be useful. I was saying that I didn't see any benefits to either of these options. Maybe there are; I just haven't seen them described. Sorry if it looked like I was asking for help on how to use Track Templates. Nevertheless, thanks for pointing out how easy it is to create them. From what little I have explored so far (see screenshots previously posted), I have some definite thoughts on how to integrate them into my existing work flow. I need to sort that out along with integrating other advanced features I have not really explored fully over the decades. When I get around to it, if I can't figure out how to do something, I will certainly want to call on your (and others') more extensive experience.** Again, thanks for the discussion here as it has pointed me to explore Track Templates! If other Cakewalk users (new and old, inexperienced and experienced) haven't yet explored them, maybe this thread will prompt them to do so. **PS: When I do, I will probably either find a thread about Track Templates (how to create and use them) or create a "Creating and Using Templates" topic if one doesn't exist. That way, this thread can return to thoughts related to Bus Templates.

I was not asking for suggestions. I was responding to the "Insert from Bus Template" issue.

Thanks for the additional information, but the details in the new posts and in the online help seem to me to be about track templates, not bus templates available directly from the bus pane of the track window. I was under the impression that the thread was about having the ability to do something like right-click in the bus area of the track pane or to otherwise insert a bus from a bus template as opposed to using a track template. Based on my tests, (1) I couldn't see the benefit there would be and (2) it seemed that buses and pre-associated sends could be inserted from track templates into new or existing projects. It is good to know that the mechanism to create Track Templates is rather straight forward. However, I still don't know if having an "Insert from Bus Template" option from the bus pane would add something new or if it would be simpler/easier than what I did. (See screenshots above.)

Update: I thought, "Maybe my method doesn't add FX Sends and that's what the other methods do." To test this, I opened up an existing project and tried another insertion from the "Insert from Track Template" menu system. See below. The template I chose added Master bus and a track with FX sends. Are you discussing adding (1) a new FX sends bus from a template and (2) having one or more existing tracks directed to that newly inserted bus all in one step? This is giving me new ideas for revamping my workflow and new methods of creating templates and projects. Thanks for raising the discussion. .

Inserting things from templates is totally new to me. I have created my own project templates and have used those for new projects based on the template. So, to learn new-to-me techniques I tried inserting a few things (1) into a newly opened midi file project, (2) into a new project with no existing tracks, and (3) into an existing Cakewalk Project. In all three cases when I selected "Insert from track template" by right clicking in the track area of the track pane and then selecting one of the "Soft Synth Track Templates," Cakewalk (2019.09 build 70) inserted both tracks and buses. For example, see below. So far as I can tell, I did not follow any of the methods listed above. So, I am wondering if I am doing something similar (just with different steps) or if what you are discussing adds in something else that I can learn about. Thanks.

-removed-