Starship Krupa

To answer the question in the topic title, the "MIDI+Keyboard" icon was retired from service with the introduction of Cakewalk Sonar. The MIDI jack icon is used for MIDI tracks. The keyboard icon is used for Synth (VI) tracks. There is no longer a special icon for Simple Instrument tracks (which are tracks that include both the VI and the MIDI tracks displayed as one unit), which leaves the "Keyboard" icon to do double duty on both Synth and Simple Instrument tracks. Long form blather: While I do agree that it would be handy to be able to tell at a glance when a track is a synth track vs. instrument track, not being able to tell is better than having it be backwards. And the way it was was backward: the "Keyboard" icon was displayed on Simple Instrument tracks while an icon that consisted of the "MIDI" and "Keyboard" icons overlaying each other was displayed on Synth tracks. There was a lot of lobbying, especially from the theme creator community, to swap them so that the icon that was essentially one with Synth and MIDI stuck together would appear on the tracks that were essentially Synth and MIDI stuck together. This lobbying was not acted upon, and the "MIDI+Keyboard" icon was quietly dropped. Those of us who cared kept our mouths shut because anything was better than having it be backward. Most users probably use either Simple Instrument tracks or separate Synth and MIDI tracks in their projects, but not both at the same time, so being able to tell them apart is not a big deal. The "MIDI+Keyboard" icon is pretty ideal for indicating a Simple Instrument tracks. I have no idea how or why they got mixed up originally, but looking at it drove me nuts. One of the first things I did with creating themes was to swap those icons around. This could theoretically have led to confusion with the images in the documentation but I didn't care.

Does toggling the plug-in's DPI awareness change anything?

What did you think of the Addictive Drums 2 facelift of a couple years ago? Going from that faux brushed aluminum 3-D fantasy spaceship control panel paradigm to the current crisp, flat look. I neglected AD2 for a long time because the UI made me feel like if I turned away and then looked back it would be 1992 and I'd be running GeoWorks on a 386. I made a new skin for Session Drummer 3 so that I didn't have to look at that faux metal panel complete with drop shadows and two little vents (or speaker grills) up at top left and right. Putting vents in the panel of something that's not even supposed to resemble an actual real world object is weird. It's worse than rack screws on FX plug-in panels. No wonder so much recent music has been so boring. The people who designed our music software UI's once dreamed of sending us to the stars. No wonder that the music made now sounds two dimensional like the current UI fashion.😁 Seriously, I reeeeeallly don't like the embossed metallic plastic 3-D look for software UI's in 2025. Maybe it was the hot thing 20 years ago but we now seem to have less need for our computer programs to look like physical objects. I used to tease Acoustica about the "woodgrain" side panels on Mixcraft's mixer. Maybe I'll live long enough to feel nostalgia for that sort of thing. Or....do you mean the Spartan, plain, homely as hell look, like the DXi plug-ins that still ship with Vegas Pro and Sound Forge? The ones that make the Sonitus fx suite look fancy? The ReaPlugs look. I think AirWindows must be the masters of that, where the plug-ins don't even have UI's, rather it's supplied by the DAW presenting the user with a generic page of labeled sliders. Do most DAW's even still let you run plug-ins using the "generic" UI? It might be fun to try a few modern plug-ins with the generic UI turned on just to see how they look. Especially something weird like Motion: Fractal or whatever.

Would you call this an "impulse" purchase? Or is there a more convoluted reason to want it?

Given what I said about Roku and Netflix and the TV manufacturers being in cahoots? Yes, let's update the app riiiiight before the holiday shopping season. It will break it on multiple streaming TV's, which means either sales of new streaming TV's, for which we get license fees, or sales of new Roku boxes, for which we get license fees.

Saverio gives the user the choice of using the omnibus installer or not. So depending on your comfort level with installers, how many licenses you own, you get to choose what method you think works best. Would that they all operated that way. Are his UI's "bland?" I guess they are compared to IK Multimedia T-RackS. They're flat, but have color.

Nobody else finds this a PITA? I guess the workaround is to start the tracks as Simple Instrument tracks and then split them, but that's another annoying step.

A video seems to be worth 1000 forum posts when it comes to getting the devs' attention. Seriously, if you want something fixed, make a YouTube video and make sure the developers see it. This has worked for XELOhh and Creative Sauce to various degrees. In regard to this topic, one long-requested fix regarding MIDI is that clip healing work the same way that it does for audio. That is, swiping across with the Smart/Comp tool automatically heals split MIDI clips without having to Bounce to Clip(s). The documentation says that it's supposed to work; I've been told that it used to work but was broken somewhere around SONAR X2.

The offer might be common, but the requirement (as in subscription ONLY) is not. There are only two DAW's currently on the market that are subscription-only and Sonar is one of them. The other is Adobe Audition. My computer system has many programs installed, and Sonar is the only one that is subscription-only. Not that there aren't multiple companies that would prefer to be selling their product solely via subscription. I mention this because I believe that it's not valuable to express resignation about software subscriptions being "typical" or "the way things are going" or whatever when that isn't the case. It's indeed becoming more the case with software that is mostly used in business and office desktop environments (for sound reasons) but not with consumer/hobbyist software. Witness what happens when companies try to make it subscription-only. The user base rebels and competitors thrive. Fortunately, with Sonar, the nag screen is pretty much the only pain. None of the other omitted features except for Workspaces and the fancier dithering options was even included until a couple of years into Cakewalk by BandLab's existence. The fancier stretch options, updated export dialog, and multiple Arranger Tracks are all CbB innovations. The Core FX are still there in their original Sonitus DXi forms. SONAR never had an Arranger Track much less multiple ones.

Eeeeeyeah, no, it's not necessary to export your tracks as .WAV files and then mix them down in Audacity. There's nothing wrong with SONAR X1's summing engine. Where things CAN (and did for me until I figured it out) go wrong with exporting from SONAR/CbB/Sonar is when you decide where you want to take the export from. I never use the "entire mix" not after some early experiences with "entire mix" not sounding quite right. Entire Mix is just another term for "render whatever's coming off your hardware outs." So if you happen to have your hardware outs turned down as a volume control for your monitoring system, or if you are using multiple hardware outs, such as speakers and headphones at the same time, you will get unexpected results. A much better way is to take the export from your Master bus, or better still, create a dedicated Export bus. That way, as long as everything you want to render is coming into that bus, everything you want to render will get rendered. This is reminding me that I wanted to request better clarification of the Entire Mix term in the Sonar documentation. The OP may not be running into Entire Mix issues, but if playback from SONAR/CbB/Sonar and render sound different, the program isn't being used correctly. Entire Mix is the most likely culprit, but there can be others, and they need to figure out which one(s) it is. With free to use fully functional newer versions of the DAW having been available for the past 8 years, it's quite easy to test this. Grab the latest Cakewalk Sonar, run it in Free Tier mode, load up your X1 project(s) and export to your heart's content. I suspect that there will be no difference, as it's so likely a matter of configuring the export options. You may even find that you prefer modern Cakewalk Sonar Free Tier, there is nothing that X1 will do that it cannot and much more that it can. Going back is always an option. To the extent that it may have been "corrected," CbB and the current Sonar Premium Tier have a revamped export dialog that may result in better choices being made, but those choices can also be made in the X1 export dialog to the same effect.

Please elaborate on this. I haven't noticed any difference in coloring track headers. Me, I at LEAST want access to all of the color choices that are different in the various existing Sonar factory color schemes. The factory schemes are proof that these colors can be changed, so there's no reason not to allow users to change them as well as developers.

I picked up Rebelle in their last Humble Bundle deal and it's great fun. It does amazing things in regard to simulating physical media. The canvases and paint blending are like nothing I've seen. Also seems more stable than Painter. Both Rebelle and Painter successfully duplicate the same vast chasm that advertising for physical materials has between the quality of what I'm able to create and the examples of pictures created by other people using the same tools.

You must have a lot of HorNet plug-ins.😁 Easily the developer from whom I have the most plug-ins I never use, but I keep buying them because they're inexpensive and Saverio is such a likeable guy. No ding on the quality of his merchandise, either, the issue is usually that I have those needs covered elsewhere. They're like the $5 CD I buy off the garage band at the local nightclub.

Netflix must have a deal with Roku to change their player app requirements often enough to sell new Roku boxes. The Apple business model. Last I checked, those were still around $30 and let you set up a great deal more apps/channels besides Netflix. Woulda been $100 less than replacing your TV. I have experience with this because I never buy TV's (not new ones anyway). I get them on Freecycle or Craig's List, and in the last 10 years or so, used TV's all seem to come with Obsolete Streaming Apps. This is a drag for people who bought streaming TV's because they save on not needing a streaming device, but is a boon for people who get their streaming elsewhere. Apps eventually do become unable to run on older Roku models, but they seem to be better at updating the OS than TV manufacturers, so the $30 Roku can be expected to last 10 years before it starts throwing messages saying that this or that app is no longer compatible. And if your sole video entertainment is Netflix and you have a device that can run their apps, you would do well to check out Kanopy and Hoopla. They're streaming services that you can access with a library card. Kanopy in particular has some great stuff on it, including various selections from the Criterion Collection. Lots of foreign cinema (Kurosawa, Bergman, French New Wave) , and documentaries about music and other cultural topics. Hoopla has (among many other things) a selection of British TV shows if you (like me) like those. Hoopla also has digital media other than video, such as a DEEP collection of music albums and electronic publications, readable and listenable via smartphone and tablet. There are also LOTS of free streaming services like PlutoTV and The Roku Channel. An old favorite of mine from when I got my first Roku box is Pub D Hub, which streams a century of public domain movies, TV, and vintage advertisements. Also educational films.

Those hussies at A|A|S tempted me with an offer to fill out my collection of their synths for $99. This got me Multiphonics CV-3, Lounge Lizard EP-5, String Studio VS-3, and Strum GS-2. That was too much for me to resist. My favorite maker of soft synths and now I have everything they make save for a handful of soundpacks. After messing with them for a week or so....I have mixed feelings. Especially about Multiphonics. I'm not much into the patch cord-y visual metaphor but I also can't really think of a better way to go about that sort of thing. The biggest complaint I have is that the default preset melts the CPU on any computer in my house. Oddly, most of the other presets play fine and nothing in any of the soundpacks does. Is it their way of filtering out buyers whose systems aren't up to running it? In the past with hoggy A|A|S patches I could reduce the number of voices and they'd settle down. I haven't had that problem since I partsed up my most recent computer, with its 10 physical cores, etc. So far, no matter what I throw at this "outdated" system, it's handled it without breaking a sweat. My problem with Multiphonics is that there's no obvious way I can find to reduce the number of voices. There's also no way I could find to turn off reverb except for patching around it. None of the FX modules has a simple bypass button on it, in order to switch a module out I have to go through the hassle of re-routing cables. Yeah, verisimilitude, but how far do they need to go with that? The unexpected delight with Multiphonics is the standalone FX plug-in. This lets you easily process other audio using a collection of Multiphonics' effects modules. They're patched together in the same fashion as the synth, with virtual patch cables. And just the stock patches sound GREAT. I guess maybe the sound generation part of Multiphonics is too simple compared to the sonic delights of their other modeling synths. They're modeling deliberately limited analog hardware modules, so no surprise that I find that the sound isn't what I've come to expect from A|A|S. Lounge Lizard is Lounge Lizard, now it has a "reed" mode, the better to model Wurlitzer type pianos with. I seem to prefer my EP's modeled rather than sampled, and Lounge Lizard is the best I've heard. String Studio sounds great, but it still has the older look to the UI. I imagine that someday I will be paying for a version that looks like Chromaphone. Strum GS-2 retains the older look. It's still my favorite fake guitar. I love all of those cool articulations like hammer ons and string scrapes and harmonics. While I love love love the way that A|A|S' products sound, I have a BIG complaint, and it's about something that's especially a pain given how many of their products I have. Chromaphone is the only one that lets you mark a preset as "favorite." With 5 synths and 2 FX, the same sound engine in all of them (proven by how Player can run any patch from any product), this makes it needlessly difficult to recall what sounds I thought were niiiiiice when I was browsing through the thousands of them I have access to. They obviously know that people want the feature, they put it in Chromaphone. The second complaint is that the UI's on their synths are so dissimilar, and needlessly so. I'm not talking about the panels for designing sounds so much as I am the way that presets are browsed, settings discovered, and so forth. I don't think it's that I'm spoiled by MeldaProduction's one-UI-fits-all approach. Each synth UI looks like it could have been designed at a different company. I don't need the products to look as similar as MeldaProduction, but from a single manufacturer I would like them to at least be a little similar. But the preset browsers on each of them are different from each other. Settings are found in different places and look different once you figure out how to open them. Still, I think the purchase was well worth it. I probably paid at least $75 each for Chromaphone and Ultra Analog, so a hundy to get the other 4 is great. Best sounding virtual instruments in the business, IMO.