Starship Krupa

? A little gasoline on the fire. If anyone actually tries the analogy, the way I'd approach it would be with something more humble, "I dunno, sweetie, I guess it's like clothes. Different outfits for different occasions? Each one sounds different and feels different and plays different." Or you could snap "You just can't stand the idea that I have something I enjoy!" No. Don't do that.

https://www.audacityteam.org/audacity-3-2-is-out-now/ How far off is VSTi support and a piano roll? ? (also future CLAP support?)

I'm surprised that nobody else picked up on this. If you just duplicate the same take of an audio track and pan it, all you get is a louder, reinforced mono track. Which sounds kind of like what you're hearing. Is this a single take just duplicated, or are these multiple takes? If what you want is the sound of a doubled vocal coming from a single track, you need to do this with FX. iZotope Vocal Doubler is a popular free plug-in that is (obviously, from the name) intended for this use. With just one track to apply FX to, you'll find it much easier to use compression. However, if I have this wrong and you did re-record your vocal multiple times, what I do for this is route the vocals to a bus, then use compression on the bus to even them out. Taking a look at some tutorials on how to EQ vocals to sit in a mix might be helpful as well. It's amazing how much low end you can roll off, and the positive effect it has on the mix. I usually wind up rolling off my vocals around 400Hz. That way they don't step on the other instruments as much.

This is not necessarily an apples-to-apples test. Your test uses the same audio file for every track. If the issue has something to do with reading the audio data off the disk, Cakewalk streams every audio file in a project in real time. If Antre's project has 130 unique tracks, that is reading 130 different audio files at the same time, that is a very different test condition. If someone has a project with over 50 different audio tracks, check that, observe how fast it goes into Play. And please, fellow forum folks, lighten up. The issue is that Antre has observed this issue across every release of Sonar/CbB for years, on multiple PC's. The idea that a single computer he's using is somehow unique and causing a problem is spurious. He's (I am presuming gender) not threatening our favorite toy, he would like to be able to use it more effectively. Testing similar projects across multiple DAW's and computers is reasonably diligent troubleshooting. He has way more experience with Sonar/Cakewalk than I do. @Antre, do post the specs of one of the computers that's exhibiting the behavior, preferably the fastest one you have. Especially memory, video card and audio data drive. If nothing else, it'll reassure the skeptics that you have plenty of computer power.

Would really like to have a .BUN file of an offending project. That way those of us who would like to help can try it on our systems and see if we get similar results. If we don't, well, that narrows it down. For those saying that it's not all that long a delay, I'm thinking maybe you don't do a lot of comping? When in that process, I'm usually constantly starting and stopping the transport to make sure the edits line up, are inaudible, etc. Those "little" delays became really annoying, got me out of the creative flow. This is not "much ado about nothing." At the time it was happening, I had two other DAW guys looking over my shoulder, one a Pro Tools guy and the other Ableton Live. They both agreed it would drive them nuts to the point of making it unusable. I do encourage the OP to get with Windows 10 unless they know for sure that something critical to them is incompatible. Letting a system age like that is just inviting trouble.

I'd like cool new stuff to come at a faster rate, but I don't think Cakewalk is falling behind. The first couple of years were a "target-rich" environment, where they had a many-years-long list of deferred bug fixes, code optimizations, and feature additions that had already been put into the pipeline. I'll go with "working on something big." For instance, it's been made pretty clear to the devs that the best feature they could add to give the program better uptake with the dance music segment is a built-in sampler. That's a pretty big job. Or maybe it's something else like the vaunted "chord track," or one of the existing areas of the program known to need some love like Staff or Matrix. Or better UI scaling. Anyway, I think they harvested a lot of low-hanging fruit, and now it's going to be something with a longer initial development cycle.

Go here, and nominate your favorites: https://www.kvraudio.com/readers-choice-awards/2022/ As usual, they've ghettoized programs that are free licensed, but I "misunderstood the rules" and nominated Cakewalk in the categories I thought were appropriate. After all, it's been said many times that Cakewalk isn't really free because you have to register for a BandLab account to install and use it. ?

Best place to ask that question and get answers is in the Q&A subforum. It can be done.

I totally misinterpreted your reply! Apologies. It didn't sound like you to say that about the last 5 years of development. ?

Wow, they sure are in mine. The customizable Smart Tool was huge. The modifier keys for dragging clip boundaries, huge. Ripple Edit indicator? Check. Nested folders? We like. Improvements to the audio engine and screen updates are pretty universal. Maybe you meant something else....but the thing is, a lot of times, the smaller fixes or feature additions are forgotten about because they're how the program should have worked in the first place. I forget that they were added because I find it hard to image the program being the old way. Maybe someday I'll catalog all of what I consider the "smaller" features that have been added since I started using Cakewalk, but that make it so much more pleasant and smooth to use....

Probably depends on whose piano roll and editing tools you like better.

Real talk: depending on how girly she is, one way to help her understand might be to gently offer that musical tools are similar to a woman's wardrobe: in need of updating from time to time. And just as difficult for the other gender to understand; I've been rocking plaid shirts and jeans for 45 years. When I started, it was "Laurel Canyon hippie rocker," then 10 years later it was punk (you get to keep the jeans longer because huge rips in them are part of the look), then 5 years after that the pinnacle of the Seattle look. If I want to switch to business casual, I grab the least faded jeans, switch to a button down and press it before I put it on. As Joe Jackson famously said "it's different for girls." The age old reply to "why do you need so many guitars?" "Same reason you need so many pairs of shoes, each one is different and used for different occasions." Just don't be a dick about it like you're throwing it back in her face. If she gets that it's a tool that you use in your (ahem, second) favorite pastime, well, the new version will let you do more and explore new things.

I thought that might be what you meant, and I'm right there with you on that. Also agree about iZotope's suites. When I got my first precious license for Ozone Elements 7 (was that the first one with the Mastering Assistant?), it was humbling. Just running through the presets, they just slew my best efforts. Then I decided to go John Henry on it and worked on my chops and mastering chain until I liked my results better. Fortunately it worked out better for me than it did the legendary Mr. Henry. It seems to me, though, that as audio (and video) production software matures, these leaps forward are coming farther between. I used to work in the software industry, then IT, and I kind of got bored with computers about 20 years ago. That was the point at which they stopped doing new things that interested me. We had full screen first-person video games, we had DAW's that would do audio and MIDI (I had a paid SONAR license back then!), and we could edit videos. Word processing, spreadsheets, online communities, laser printers, color printers, all that stuff that revolutionized what people could do. Once those were all in place, I stopped getting excited about computers themselves and just went about using those tools. The big innovation is that the price of admission has dropped so steeply. Those were the things that interested me, and now I can have them literally for free. My last 2 DAW computers were ones that people gave me. They both still run Cakewalk with aplomb. I don't know that I'd want to try much video editing on the Core 2 Quad system, but it's now in the hands of a friend who will be recording with Cakewalk and a load of plug-ins that I handpicked to run well on it. It ran Vegas Pro 10 reasonably well, and again, I never scratched the surface with that version.

I neglected to mention earlier: the Meldaproduction MFreeFX Bundle* has (among 36 other excellent tools and processors) a very comprehensive loudness analyzer called MLoudnessAnalyzer. As far as limiters, my favorite safety limiter is KHS Limiter, from the (also freeware) Kilohearts Essentials Bundle. Barebones, lightweight, easy to configure. (*If you ever want to upgrade the Melda bundle to the pro versions (which gives you access to some nice-but-not-crucial features like the ability to customize the look of the plug-ins and internal upsampling), they put it on sale for 50% off a couple of times a year. You can combine that with the 10 euro bonus you get from signing up for their newsletter and also with their 20% first purchase discount (use my referral code, MELDA1923165) and bring the cost for the pro upgrade down around USD11.)

I agree in some cases, in others, less so. In the case of iZotope's suites, they're known for applying the latest analysis methods to automate as much of the process as they can. So if you want what they have to offer, part of the price you'll have to pay is resource management. Either get a system that's powerful enough to run what you want to run without a second thought or get good at managing what resources you do have, by freezing tracks, waiting until mastering time to use mastering FX, etc. Me, I don't really care much about iZotope Ozone. I didn't even install it on my new computer. It was great when I was newer at this, but it's been the case for a long time that I like how my mastering sounds better than what Ozone comes up with. I guess my philosophy is that, regardless of the generation of the software, if it's doing something computation-intensive, well, that's just the way it is. If I want to run it, I have to have a system capable of running it. When I start to scrutinize is with established types of software. There's no reason that I can think of for a basic compressor or EQ to push the limits of my hardware. Maybe that's part of what you mean by "generation?" Not so much "version" as "what it will do?" I learned early on to steer clear of Acustica. I was trying to run things from them that were just compressors and EQ's, and it was bogging my system. Sorry, Acustica, but there are plenty of great-sounding compressors and EQ's out there that barely touch my system resources. The reverbs that I consider to be the best-sounding I've heard (Exponential) have been around for a long time and are not too hard on resources. I only use one or two instances of reverb in my mixes anyway. I'd even go as far as to say that if the software is still being updated, and those updates are mostly maintenance updates, it's not unheard of for the latest versions (as opposed to generations, I guess) to be less resource-hungry, due to code optimization. Looking at Cakewalk itself here. Nothing has been added to Cakewalk in some time that would justify it becoming more resource-hungry in basic use, and indeed, it runs more efficiently than it did 4 years ago on the same systems. If some high-powered data-crunchy analyze-y functions were added to the program, I would expect greater resource usage when using those functions, but not at other times. It's good business for software companies to pay attention to system requirements. The more systems out there that are able to run a program, the more potential customers there are for it. Especially in a field like music that often attracts people with less disposable income. It used to be that we'd have to just suck it up whenever a new version of Windows (or Office or whatever) came out because it would usually require a fair horsepower upgrade, but when was the last time that was the case? Windows 11 supposedly leaves behind a lot of computers based on hardware, but my understanding is that it's not due to performance requirements, it's due to nervous-nellie security requirements. "Um....yeah, we're gonna need you to install those TPM modules. Great. Yeah." The computer industry has reached a point, both with software and hardware, where we can actually choose whether we want to upgrade. The audio software I have is already beyond my ability to fully learn before I finish my time here on this lovely planet. Unless there's some innovation that results in the audio sounding much better (something I never rule out), I'm okay for a while. Even though my interest in games has picked up in the past 6 months, the kind of games I'm interested in run like a bat on my aging computers. Slower-moving adventure-y things that don't require a fast frame rate to play.

Glad I could help you sort it out. I knew about the issue because I had a project or two that exhibited it at one point. Well done to narrow it down to a plug-in; it took me a lonnnnng time to figure out that that was what was causing it. It didn't occur to me to hit the "FX" button. Since changing plug-in parameters will flip Cakewalk's "dirty" bit (the indicator that says a save-worthy change has been made), my guess is that somehow, these plug-ins are changing their own parameters and reporting that to Cakewalk. It would make sense with a plug-in that like an analyzer or dynamic EQ, constantly adapt to whatever signal is going through them. Reporting to the host that something has changed in the plug-in when it actually hasn't is what I would call a bug. The only events that should trigger that reporting are ones where the user is interacting with it by changing control states or values.

I have so many good plug-ins that I can adopt a policy where if a plug-in can't run well on my i7 6700 system, it's not the computer that's going to get replaced. I don't know if it's that I'm good at winnowing or what, but my i7 3770 system is adequate to the task of being my main DAW, and was so up until a couple of months ago. When I audition plug-ins, I look carefully at their performance, how well they use resources. The ones that use too much processing power don't make the team.

This issue is probably caused by having File/Advanced/Auto-save set to save after every X changes. What happens is that some plug-ins constantly report to Cakewalk that something has changed, even multiple times per second, so if you have Cakewalk set to auto-save after every 5 changes and this plug-in is reporting a change 5X per second, Cakewalk will save every second. I just made those numbers up to illustrate it, it seems that this Waves plug-in is reporting changes even more often. So as a workaround, you can turn off the auto-save every X changes on projects that use the plug-in, or, since it's a metering plug-in, bypass it when you're not reading the meter. Whatever, an analysis plug-in shouldn't be reporting ANY changes to Cakewalk, so if turning off save every X changes makes the problem go away, Waves need to be informed about it. I don't know if there's anything that can be done on Cakewalk's side; they're probably at the mercy of the plug-in reporting accurately that it has changed something.

Avid continues to innovate.

I think I owned for months before I really put it to the test and went "WHUUUTT??" Last couple of years I went on an acquisition rampage for basically anything that said "Glitchmachines" or "Unfiltered Audio" on it. All of those buffer-y glitch-y sound design-y delaythings. And somewhere in there I got a license for Objeq Delay for free, I think it was a PB buy anything get this deal. I only gave it a surface glance, nice to have another delay, not too sure how their acoustic modeling fits into a delay but whatever. Then, weeks or months later, I remembered that I had this thing and tried it on a source I was trying to warp in an interesting way. WHOA, who's that inside this plug-in? Turns out it does the crazy kind of thing that those other companies' monstrous buffy-glitchy plug-ins do, but gets more usable results more quickly. Not sure how to put it, but I find myself thinking that I'd like to put some mangle on a sound, the Glitchmachine or UfA effect will be "too much" whereas Objeq Delay definitely weirds it up, but in a more euphonic way. if that makes sense. Abacab probably knows what I mean. The other ones are definitely powerhouses of sound altering ability, but they're harder to control, and, especially, their presets sometimes result in sounds that have nothing at all to do with the source sound, they would sound the same no matter what you fed them. The presets in Objeq Delay are weird enough, but more instantly usable and attractive. For the kind of rhythmic complication that I like to add, the thing is so good at it that it can feel like cheating. Like, "I want to do something really interesting with this sound," then I throw on Obeq Delay, and seconds later, one of the presets with a touch, if any, adjustment is perfect for the song. What it does is so interesting that it feels like it should be harder to accomplish.

I can definitely understand wanting to find a new tool, but QUICK in that kind of situation. Not a Sonar user at that point, but when I read the bad news I had a "great disturbance in the Force" moment of empathy with the userbase. You know how much I participate here (including upstairs), a DAW isn't just the program, it comes with a community of users, a history, a culture. That was Ed? Beyondcakewalk.com? I just tried going there and I guess he finally let the domain registration lapse.

15 minutes of asking themselves some basic questions and then writing down the answers. 1. What do most of the people who run our program want to do? 2. What is the most direct, practical path a program like ours can take to allow them to do it and get on with their lives? My guess is that 90% (or greater) of the time someone runs Melodyne because they've heard one or more clinkers and want to identify and re-pitch them so that they will be in tune with the rest of the song. To that end it should analyze the track, give you a display of the notes it identifies and a visual indication of which ones have landed on an A440 12-tone scale and how far off any of them might be. Then it should put you right into dragging the notes onto that 12-tone scale, with the snap set to snap TO the scale. OPTIONALLY, you could choose a more restrictive scale like major or minor, and a tuning other than A440. Or adjust the snap strength or switch the snap into "by" mode or whatever. The software should be able to do all of that in less time than it took me to type it, but for whatever reason, well, when you start up Melodyne Essentials, it's like trying to pet a sting ray that's been having a bad day. And someone gave it Ritalin to try to mellow it out. Maybe you thought that because you owned the "essentials" version that you'd be getting a simplified version that would just do stuff like the above? Ha HAAAA, you've got to be kidding. No, what you get looks exactly like the full version except that the features that you don't get don't work, but you won't learn this until after you try them. They're all still there cluttering up the UI and menu system. I have a vague memory of running it and it starting up in snap "by" mode and spending the better part of an hour trying to drag one bum note onto the scale grid and being confounded when it would not stay put. It never occurred to me that it would start in snap "by" mode (and with the snap sensitivity set to CROWBAR) because who would ever, ever want that, and if even if they sometimes did, it's preposterous to consider that the program would start up with that as the default behavior. The thought was so ridiculous that my brain rebelled against hosting it, even provisionally. (For those of you in the "but I always want to nudge an out-of-tune-note by a rigid semitone so that it's still out-of-tune except now it's precisely a semitone flatter or sharper than what it was" camp, be quiet. If you say anything I will immediately think less of you, and I suspect I'd not be alone in that. Protect your reputation and play along) I do like the visual metaphor they use, where syllables are golden turds connected by arteries. And you can click on one of the turds, sorry "blobs" and it will sustain the sound while you're dragging it, that's swell indeed. Why must that simple brilliant thing be wrapped in so many metres of WTF? If Synchro Arts has managed to come up with something with a more transparent workflow (I see that it at least retains the turds 'n' arteries visual metaphor), I think that Celemony do have a lunch that's there for the eating. I won't truly be happy until Meldaproduction puts it in their FreeFX bundle.

BTW, Objeq Delay is one of my most very favorite FX and if I didn't already have a license for it, $10 would be nothing to get my hands on what it does.

I've wondered this myself, and I do think there are situations where it happens. First, there are just people for whom the $119 difference doesn't mean much in terms of impacting their finances. Or someone's trying to deliver a big project on a deadline, they decide (maybe are told) that the thing they really need to bring it home is this or that bit of software? And they don't stay "on top" of the deals the way that we do? Dedicated followers of this forum know that chasing audio software deals is far from "free," in that it takes an investment in time and attention. I had a friend who was working on a project at my place several years ago, and he determined that an effect I sorely lacked in my collection was a good Leslie speaker emulation. This was several years ago, when both the freeware FX scene and my dollar investment in plug-in licenses were much smaller. He was going to buy me one, and I'm sure he wouldn't have agonized over trying to find one on sale. I can't remember how that worked out, I remember that we didn't wind up buying a Leslie emulation. Someone putting together a "turnkey" DAW system for a client might not pay much attention to shaving dollars off the cost of plug-ins. The kind of people that things like the Plugin Alliance subscription plans and Waves Update and Meldaproduction CompleteFX bundle are made for, maybe? Where the fees for a single project more than cover the cost of a couple of plug-ins. I get the idea that most of us who follow this forum closely are more toward the "hobby studio" side? Things that I buy to do hobbies are different from things I buy to do my job, although I have enough of a frugal nature that I grub for the best deals possible on everything I buy. For me, it's a fun game where the object is "get the highest quality/utility tools for the least amount of money." It's a subset of the larger hobby. Not everyone's like that. Some people don't consider spending an hour researching how to get something for $10 instead of $40 to be time well spent. I find it enjoyable, but some people think it's a chore and would rather be doing something else with that hour. Or they're too busy, maybe getting paid for their time. And then....there are people who just don't know better. We all know that if we want something, where to check to make sure we get the best possible price. Most people aren't as savvy. Once a week or so I check in at the Cakewalk Reddit and answer a few incredibly basic tech questions about Cakewalk for people who somehow weren't aware that there's this whole forum with years of solved problems in it. This despite the fact that in the program's main menu, under Help, there's a direct link to the forum. Every couple of weeks, someone will post in the Instruments and Effects subforum asking if anyone can suggest a freeware this or that to use with Cakewalk. Of course we already have a thread each for freeware instruments and effects in that subforum, dozens of pages of information.

The UI looks a bit less baffling, which would, indeed, make it better for me at least. My time spent with Melodyne has a really unfavorable ratio of "time spent figuring out how to bludgeon the software into doing what I want (usually nudging a note or two into pitch)" to "actually doing what I want to do with the software." Usually it takes me the better part of an hour to do the first and then minutes to do the second. My experiences with using it have been so unpleasant that I don't use it enough to get good at it, and I have to climb Mt. Learningcurve every time. A lot of that time is "elbowing my way past features that aren't available in my version." I enjoy it more when I imagine that it's displaying the entrails of the person responsible for its menu system.