Starship Krupa

I wuz gonna say that if your CPU is getting hot enough to throttle, whatever the CPU load, you need to either repair or replace your CPU cooling system. Looks like you figured that out. My favorite tool for monitoring temperatures, fan speeds, CPU core clocks, etc. is HWinfo. It has 3 different modes, one of which is "sensors only." I keep this running all the time on my main system, as it keeps track of minimums and maximums of whatever it's monitoring over time. The other two modes are system configuration reports, one of which is the most detailed of any such report I know and can tell such things as what devices are plugged into the system's various USB controllers, what date the RAM was manufactured, and so on. Keeping HWinfo's sensors running during your present troubles would reveal your current, average, minimum, and maximum CPU speeds and temperatures. It might be interesting and valuable to check it before and after you replace the cooling system.

The behavior you are seeing is not normal and definitely not "as designed." $onar will by default replace instances of Sonitus FX with their Core FX equivalents, but it's not "irreversible" under normal circumstances. What's happening on your system is not normal. It's certainly unfortunate that it all played out this way for you. On my systems, CbB and SONAR Platinum and $onar all run fine. I had a scare at first because I didn't realize exactly how CbB needed to be reconfigured; I had to disable the automatic VST3 migration in SPlat and CbB, but that's all. You should most definitely try to sort out the crashes and failures to start that you're having. They're not as designed, and they're not normal, so you should be able to. SONAR and CbB and $onar have always been carefully engineered and tested so that installations of the newest version of the DAW will coexist with the older versions. The only caveat is that if your project uses features from the latest one that didn't exist in the earlier one, you'll have to allow for that when trying to open the project in a previous version. It shouldn't crash or corrupt anything, but you may have to make some changes to allow it to play correctly if it uses new features that would affect that, such as routing options that didn't exist in the past.

My guess is that they have their own methods of keeping track of the devices rather than relying solely on the information Windows supplies.

Yes and yes.

It won't if you follow the instructions in the first post in this topic. The point of this topic is to warn about this and inform users how to avoid it. It isn't irreversible. Don't overwrite your old SONAR or CbB projects after opening them in $onar or SoFT. When trialing new software, it's never a good idea to overwrite the projects you've created in the older version. Always keep a backup copy.

Wow, that IS truly amazing and inspiring. Instead of taking the usual thought path of "oh we can do that all easily with the tools we have now" he tries to duplicate the methods as much as the performance. To me, it suggests that chasing the sonic tools and techniques used by ones heroes is not as futile as many suggest with the "tone is all in the fingers, maaaan" mantra. Yeah, you DO have to have the chops to pull it off, but getting your gear as close as possible isn't as silly a pursuit as some suggest. Yes, in subsequent decades Paul McCartney, John Lennon, George Harrison and Ringo Starr all sounded unmistakably like themselves no matter what gear they were playing or singing through or who was recording them, but they never sounded like they did on Revolver. I might listen to "I'm Only Sleeping" and hear that they're using a primitive version of chorus/flanging on the vocals, but I would not have worked out that they did it with someone working the speed knob manually. That's a performance in and of itself. Could it be done entirely in the box? When you manually adjust the playback speed of a tape deck, both pitch and speed are adjusted. For every move you make in one direction, you must make one in the other direction so that by the end of the song, they're not too far out of sync. He uses the natural imperfections of the cassette format to approximate it, but that's not the same as controlling it in real time. It's still random. You could try duplicating the vocal track, then putting RC-20 or Needlepoint or whatever on one track and not on the other using their approximation of wow and flutter, but that would only duplicate his process, not the realtime performance of the tape op turning the knob. Is there a way to set that up using a control surface? You'd need to have control over both pitch and speed and be mindful of having to nudge it in both directions. It would be so much trouble to set up and execute that 99% of people would just say screw it and slap on something like Quadrovox and leave it at that. You want vocals that are thickened via pitch shift? You gottit. But that leaves out the effect of having them also become out of sync in the time domain....

This will be an interesting watch, with the thumbnail implying that they used an advance prototype of a Tascam Portastudio. Flip the cassette over, record the guitar solo, flip it back?

The current iteration looks pretty slick compared to what I remembered. Are you current with it? Question, then: what did you find so scary about Scaper? I watched Sampleson's YouTube video, and yeah, it even seems like the original sound one uses has little to do with the sound Scaper generates, to the point that I wondered why they bothered letting users start with their own samples. Whatever you dump into it turns into a huge, granular, ambient drone. Wax cylinder of John Philip Sousa marches: huge, granular, ambient drone. Dialog sample from TV commercial: huge, granular, ambient drone. It's not difficult to make a huge, granular, ambient drone. Throw Supermassive on a Swatches pad, maybe something from the Cinematique soundpack, and you're right there. Or the aforementioned free Soundpaint sounds. Huge, ambient drones right out of the box. I haven't personally tried PaulXStretch (the old UI was more intimidating) or Scaper. A number of YT comments claim that Scaper is just a dumbed down version of PaulXStretch. Since PaulXStretch is open source software, it could literally be that. Take away some of the less-used controls and the Iris-like waveform display, put big round knobs on it.... I have SO many simple ways to create sounds like that, an overabundance of choices is a problem: I don't know which one to reach for. The neighborhood doesn't seem any less safe. With everyone able to access huge, granular, ambient drones in seconds, the question is still: so you have cavernous halls of whooshiness at your fingertips, how do you make your piece stand out, or in the case of scoring, how do you make it support what's happening on screen? When I put on 9128.live, in the parade of Cavernous Whooshcore why are some of the pieces interesting and some boring? It's hard to put into words, but I know when I hear it. It's why I brought up iZotope Ozone earlier in the topic: if it delivers results that equal or beat what a person can do using their best tools, then that person needs to find something else to do (which may be "gittin gud" with those tools). If it only gets 90% of the way, with a live person needed to do the remaining 10%, then it's just another tool and what's been eliminated is likely drudge work.

I just discovered PaulXStretch, a FOSS plug-in that has been around for years. It didn't sound a death knell for creative ambient sound design, and in over a year that it's been around, neither has Scaper. I can hold two handed chords using free Soundpaint libraries and get similar (or better) results. As ever, it's more about what you do with the sounds rather than how they are generated. Frozen meals didn't put chefs out of business; they didn't even stop people from home cooking.

Do you mean that your tracks sound literally incorrectly synchronized? Notes slightly off, etc.? Or is the issue that the tracks aren't blending well? Those are separate issues. One is a technical problem, the other a matter of learning mixing skills.

I find this to be a good policy in general and apply it to all situations.

Nice, I'm always interested in ways to control the DAW with my iPad or iPhone. Has me wondering it this could work via Bluetooth MIDI, which Sonar does support.

RFK.

Did he, though? From what I've read, it was a mutually agreed upon split. The classic "musical differences." Alice wanted to head more in one direction and the guys wanted to lean more into their hard rock style. Also Alice was slipping deeply into alcoholism at the time.

The Cakewalk subreddit can be entertaining in this regard, because its charter is to be about "all Cakewalk products," which now includes Next. Also because Reddit in general sort of has an "eternal sunshine of the spotless mind" thing going anyway. Each day dawns as if no question had ever been answered before. There was someone spluttering on there because they thought that when CbB stops activating, they were expected to switch to Cakewalk Next, which they'd tried and thought was too unlike CbB. Last week someone asked why there were two versions of "Cake Walk," and which one should they choose, Sonar or "Now." Thinking about it, I guess Ableton, Inc. would need to come up with a plan in the event they ever wish to release a product other than Live! IIRC, Twelve Tone Systems went the other direction, renaming the company Cakewalk after its biggest product. Then Cakewalk the program switched its name to SONAR (something I thought they'd never make stick, but they did), then Cakewalk the company ceased to exist and the product became Cakewalk (again), now Cakewalk is a sub brand of BandLab and has multiple DAW's, one named Sonar.