Starship Krupa

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.

That feature existed in SONAR and Cakewalk by BandLab up until the Sonar UI. I'm sad that it was removed, and would like it to come back, even if it has to be an option rather than default. "Show clip color in clip headers"

I think this is a great idea.

I hadn't even noticed that. Another discrepancy between audio editing and MIDI editing that I'd like to see fixed. Swipe to heal is the biggest for me, but this is along the same lines, and since there's no other way to "heal" MIDI clips, we do end up using Bounce to Clip(s) often.

I see what you did there. I like that, too. "Snr" being the one with a few bits missing.

The lad is on fire. Okay, new set of contenders for fanonical abbreviations: "$onar" for the paid tier and "SoFT" for the freebie.

It would be nice if, for clarity's sake, free tier and membership versions had names that would distinguish one from the other. I like "Sonar Premium" for the one that has all the features. Or even "Sonar Full." Even if they're not official, we have to call them something. SPlat and CbB were widely used abbreviations that helped readers know what someone was using. I hereby propose to the forum "SoFT" as the abbreviation for Sonar Free Tier. The membership version could be "SoPre," maybe?

Since IMO, the "Entire Mix" option isn't spelled out enough in the documentation, I'm posting this description from one of the Cakewalk developers. What it boils down to is that if you are using more than one hardware out, for instance a headphone mix using sends, Entire Mix is not the best option. To expand, it's not an issue for people using interfaces that have only one stereo output, but for people like me, whose main interface has 5 stereo (10 mono) outputs. I use multiple outputs for things like referencing on different sets of speakers and cue mixes. In my projects, I have a dedicated bus where I can switch to whatever output I want. Instead of a hardware speaker switch, I use that bus. It works great, but if I were to export using "Entire Mix," Sonar would sum all of those outputs, whether my bus was switched to them or not. There are multiple ways to manage it. Of course there are, this is Sonar. My solution is to have a dedicated Export bus. All of my project templates include one. My Master bus routes to it rather than directly to a hardware out. It routes to the hardware out that feeds my main monitors. At export time, I choose to export only from this bus. That way I know that what I get in the export is what I'm hearing in the monitors. There are no FX on my Export bus except for a loudness meter. It's a great place to put it. Another solution is to mute any audio that's being routed to a hardware out. I don't do it this way because I might forget to mute it. I hope this clarifies what "Entire Mix" means and when you might not want to use it.

I believe that if you're having trouble activating legacy Soundspot plugins, you can contact Plugin Boutique support and they'll help you sort it out. Was never sure about the relationship between Soundspot and PB....

Since the new Cakewalk Core FX don't have any built-in help, I think that such a thing might be a way to go about equipping them with documentation.

Ah, I see the PA version has the usual bar along the bottom with the "?" on the right....thanks!

I had uninstalled due to, as Brian says, having other spread management tools like Mongoose, but I just now reinstalled it via Plugin Alliance. At least with the PA version, there don't seem to be any presets or any documentation or tooltips, so that might have also put me off. Does anyone know if there's documentation for the thing? It looks capable and has an attractive UI, but I can't figure out what all of the controls do. Mr. Swivel and his associates went to the trouble to create the thing, then gave me a license for it, and I'd like to give it a fair shake.

Doing a cleanup on a Windows system is not a bad thing to do. Programs like CCleaner that do it on autopilot can, as you discovered, lead to unintended consequences. I'm sure that there are settings in CCleaner Pro that will allow you to bypass certain procedures such as messing with your redistributables. CCleaner apparently believes that everything should run fine with only the very latest redistributables installed, and that's clearly not the case. Other than that issue, have you found your system to be "running better" after using CCleaner? There are many Windows tweaks that a user can do to extend the life of older PC's. Simple ones like disabling visual effects that look neato but actually just make things take longer to execute. Power plan settings. BIOS settings.

You're posting in the Sonar forum, so I'll assume that you are using Sonar (and probably also have Cakewalk by BandLab installed). The location you should place your metronome wave files is C:\Cakewalk Content\Sonar\Metronome. If you chose the default locations when you installed Sonar.

Ozone is not "a plugin." Ozone, Neutron, Nectar, and RX are all suites. iZotope calls them that. I agree with some of what people are saying here. The need to keep every version of every iZotope suite I've ever owned is a PITA, and it would be great if they could somehow fix that. For individual plugins, I don't care how high the version numbers get as long as they're not trying to charge me for upgrades in name only (Waves). Ozone 12 looks to have some interesting additions, and if I were a pro who used Ozone I'd likely snag it. But I'm a hobbyist who has Ozone Advanced and has not touched it in over a year. To me, it's a GREAT tool for applying to rough mixes to sweeten them up. Since the dismantling of my recording space, I haven't been recording anyone else, so no need for rough mixes. As for the individual plug-ins in the suite, they look great and sound great, but they are resource hogs. iZotope really needs to tighten their code. It was so disappointing to try Neoverb when I finally got it and see how they had wrapped the ecellent Exponential algorithms in their signature bloat code.

Thanks, 9! I would have missed this if you hadn't bumped it. Wasn't the Stay Creative bundle a gift during pandemic lockdown? IIRC, the first place I saw the name DJ Swivel was a collaboration with Soundspot. Since one of the most common uses of Soundspot plug-ins back when they existed was to qualify for PB BOGO's, I wound up with many Soundspot licenses. Some quite good, others useless (or worse). I don't have all of them installed any more, but there are still some gems.