mettelus

:( I remember that guy well. One HUGE caution with a kit is the workers doing assembly might literally be hired off the street. Never before or since have I seen so much glue used on a nut :( It literally only needs enough not to fall out, but seeing that nut shatter into pieces was a shocker. Even reviewing kits for feedback from actual buyers, there can be massive variation in who did the work for assembly.

Tip of the iceberg... I am still waiting for the "As I got started, I decided to rework every guitar I own!" part ? I think I left off at the replacement neck portion of things, but I forgot which guitar that neck was for now?

SMBAN is going to give you prompt jumps and flat tops like in Glenn's picture above. In order to achieve rallentando, the tempo map is your friend. While SMBAN can drive "anchor points" in the piece to define the measure "map," you will need to adjust the tempo to get the slope you desire like what Jonesey posted above.

That MB will run a PCI 3.0 without issues (see the Expansion Slots section). Years ago, I got a STRIX GTX 970 to replace a dying GTX 580 in an old machine. Your PS should be fine with most cards, but check power consumption and design of them. NVIDIA owns the architecture, not the manufacturing design, so there are variations on cards by manufacturer due to this.... the 970 came in 3 major variants and one had cooling akin to a jet engine, which was why I went with the STRIX design at that time. The 730 has a benchmark of 834 on the "High Mid Range" list, so if you scroll around on the "High End" listing you can find price points that suit your needs for a replacement (can search that page for "GTX" to get a feel for things), but the 9-series models might be the best bang-for-the-buck for you (and significant improvement in performance). Both the GTX 980 and GTX 970 have similar price points; but again check the design/specs of anything you consider to ensure it suits your needs.

That is interesting, since the sax can't be muted like a trumpet can. It is even more interesting that the Cry Baby was first made in '67... although a few others existed earlier in the decade, that is almost "cutting edge" forethought into the tools available at that time. The late 60s/early 70s had a lot of new toys made and (of course) folks were seeing what else they could do with them.

+1, the footprint of newer programs is often overwhelming (both load time and RAM consumption) with obtuse features that no one will know or care about. I keep an old copy of Paint Shop Pro 5 for this very same reason (and is also my default image viewer). 17.6MB (is from 1998 when JASC still owned it) and opens instantaneously, with layers, histogram adjustments, and a standard set of manipulations (cloning, FX, etc.). I keep that on all of my thumb drives as well to edit ppt presentations on the fly when needed, which has happened more frequently than it should. Brushes seem to add undue overhead to the newer Corel versions of Painter/Paint Shop Pro; but even without that burden, the GUI is cluttered IMO. JASC at least thought far enough ahead to use "available RAM," so it can open and manipulate massive pictures without issue. Escape Motions (Rebelle 7 and Flame Painter 4) have become my default for complex graphic manipulations; but for bread and butter work, PSP5 remains the go to for me.

When power density increases, heat dissipation is paramount to longevity. Surface cooling gives a temperature gradient to drive the thermal flux, but the peak temp is going to be at the center of mass (if cooled on all sides). Trivia data point... the inductive writer (head) in old drives was spec'd to 255C (491F), to give an error margin for network drives that might be running 24/7 way back when (like 25 years ago)... they also have minimal (or no) cooling, so certainly by no means a good comparison, just an example of how hot small electronics can get. A lot of new wafer technology is geared for density, so thermal (and dielectric) breakdown aren't overly surprising, but it is disappointing to see that this was probably known prior to production, and the reaction to it (by Intel from this article) is rather appalling to me. At least they did specify the "non-K versions"... when something can be overclocked it will run even hotter, so they most likely have a beefed up insulation/dissipation design to them.

I am still highly skeptical of a floating floor just due to the simple civil engineering aspect of a "floor," whether it be a concrete slab or pressed to a foundation via the weight of a structure. The lower a floor is in a home, the more inherent dampening it will have, and there are even structural requirements for resonance of higher floors if made of concrete (for earthquakes, or even people walking on them). The OP in this thread hit the majority of what I was thinking, but it only briefly touched upon inherent dampening and sound propagation into/out of inherently dampened surfaces (where reflection is the primary issue). If a floor is truly floated (some descriptions I saw were not), it can remove a substantial amount of inherent dampening and allow the floor to resonate at frequencies dependent on its size and composition (dampening is what offsets resonance). Walls, yes... the further you get from a foundation, the less inherent dampening is present, and walls are typically not constructed for this purpose (i.e., a "stick built house")... but a floor, not so much, unless in close proximity to environmental vibrations in the earth (i.e., a freeway).

I don't think you are missing anything. With the massive tweak-ability of an amp sim (far beyond a real amp), you can morph between cab types almost at will (within reason).

Another thing to check in addition to the above is if you have assigned any MIDI Learn to a plugin that can affect pitch/key, especially if this occurs at specific/repeatable places in a project's playback. If MIDI Learn is assigned to audible notes, the issue will be repeatable (not random) based on the notes played.

Out of curiosity, did they explain the reasoning for this? I checked out their site quick but didn't find a reference. In my experience, structural isolation has only had two applications - optics tables (specifically for high precision lasers so external/environmental vibrations do not transmit to the table), and sound isolation to prevent transmission of mechanical vibration to the walls (specifically machinery to the hull of a submarine). In neither case would sound within the room be affected, so it is intriguing me as to why it was recommended.

Hey Grem, looks good. Every time I see a clean flat piece of wood I think "laser engraver" now. The perspective in that last picture makes the headstock so huge it looks like a body blank! You should post updates on those builds. There are more folks than just me interested in projects like that. It is music-related too and doesn't mention any DAWs, so you are safe ?

This is definitely something to consider if you have a "slug" of things that need to be purchased within a year, and is even offered when you make a purchase (saves on that initial purchase as well) so can have a year to figure out what you may need in the coming months. This hit me with the LP kit I got a few years ago, and was a net savings for me with the membership. The reason I say this wasn't directly mentioned above... StewMac rakes you over the coals for shipping/handling otherwise, so if you have a slug of goodies needed for the year (including that initial purchase), it can pay itself off. It is very similar to Amazon Prime in that regard... if you are buying often, the free shipping adds up... if you get a one-off every 8 months, it probably won't be worth it. I had let mine expire after that LP kit was completed, but I got all of the replacement hardware I wanted before it ran out.

What may or may not play into this is the ones I asked about have dedicate/proprietary playback engines. VSL onboarded with this even before the release of SO5.2 (what is demonstrated at the 8-minute mark in the video above), but it didn't seem to catch on unfortunately. From my perspective the marketing potential for VSTis to include Sound Variations (they could even say "Your DAW may call them Articulation Maps") would be huge for potential customers.... rather than the "Hey, figure out how our playback engine (or your DAW) works and you are good to go!" it would be "Get our cool instrument, and you will be composing to its full potential by just drag/dropping it into your host!" (all articulations and controls are exposed and labeled... contact your DAW if you cannot see them!). DAWs will give access to things that are exposed to it by the plugin, but then a lot of manual work is (often) required as long as they are exposed (some proprietary ones are not). This is something each and every user must trudge through (sometimes for hours), and still may not be "right." I had a hunch when asking that some vendors would prefer forcing their playback engine on users, rather than let the users drive the playback engine seamlessly with their DAW... if Sound Variations were included, the user only needs to load an instrument and (could then) close the engine window, so users might never actually look at "the awesome GUI" created for it.

This was exactly my reaction. Not sure what some plugins do from the name only, but some of the obvious FX have free versions readily available. That replacement list just comes across as product promotion to me (and some pretty expensive ones at that).

An interesting side topic from this was their implementation of Sound Variations (very akin to articulation maps) since SO5.2. While users can create these manually, it provided the ability for the vendor to embed them into the plugin directly so you can just open a plugin and boom, they are all there and mapped 100% accurately. I have reached out to a few vendors on some plugins with complex mappings and essentially got back "too difficult to implement" even though the vendor has the precise mapping in house to benefit the user tremendously (i.e., the vendor knows the "full map" while each and every user must fumble with creating one manually... although these can be shared, they are often lackluster in many cases). The intent was to save users a lot of time, but being linked to only one DAW it took off like a lead balloon. As mentioned above with the VST3 spec, there is no requirement to implement the full feature set, which has also led to instances where a VST3 version may not work properly, but the VST2 version does. So much of this falls back onto the vendor side. Quick Edit: The 8 minute mark in the above video demonstrates the ideal case for how Sound Variations can load if embedded by the vendor... simply open the instrument, and they are loaded automatically.

+1 to the above. Ideally you want your active project's data inside the machine you are working on (even on the C drive if you must). External drives (especially large USB 2 spinners) can have excessive seek times, especially when fragmented. When working with that many audio files, the drive needs to find each one, and may only be loading enough of each to fill the buffer, then repeating. If you have the option to get large sets of data off your internal drive (move to the external), that will be the best case. The contents of your "C:\Users\[username]\Downloads" could potentially be huge and can be moved. Contents of both "C:\Users\[userame]\AppData\Local\Temp" and "C:\Windows\Temp" may be huge if you have never purged them (you can also clean many files with Windows "Disk Cleanup" and selecting "Clean up system files" after choosing your C drive). There is a truckload of temporary files on the C drive that get put in place when apps are opened, but rarely get purged. Anything "in use" will not let you delete them, but the rest can go in both of those Temp directories. Another option that may help (with slower drives), is to enable Read and Write Caching in CbB itself... Preferences->Audio->Sync and Caching (need "Advanced" at the bottom checked to see that option on the left). Typically, 512KB for both the wirte and read I/O buffers can help in that situation, but is also system dependent.

Hmmm.... Right at the top of the Coffee House it states: "This is an inclusive discussion area, intended to promote music-related discussions that do not pertain specifically to Cakewalk software. Users of all experience levels and backgrounds can ask questions and share knowledge. By making your posts music-related, you help preserve the quality of these discussions. As with all of our communities, we encourage mutual respect..." There is a contradiction here.

For the OP, rather than type the same thing and have it deleted again, I sent you a PM. I am assuming you didn't see the replies yesterday. If someone asks a legitimate question, they deserve a legitimate answer. As simple as that.

Yeah, those really screw with ideal gas law equations.

Re-read this thread so another quick comment. It seems "music theory" gets a lot of attention, which is a nicety for sure, but there is significantly more to Scaler 2 than that. The performance features are also of note, although they are also classified in musical terminology so they sort of force you to learn terms (e.g., Italian). These can also be used to directly drive another VSTi (great for noodling around), or even dragged/dropped into a MIDI track. Although there is a performance engine internally, I find that more overhead than the drag/drop method (too many mouse clicks and you can work faster in the PRV). I also have an affinity for anacrusis, which seems to be the bane of many VSTi sequencing engines. As mentioned early on, definitely worth the trial. Also recommended to check the tutorials first (to understand the full feature set and GUI) before the trial to get the most out of that decision period.

+1. This is a feature that rarely gets mentioned but can be very useful. Even though piano was my first instrument, I consider myself predominantly a guitarist. A lot of chords and inversions get lost in the "reality" of finger dexterity on a guitar (either difficult or impossible to fret properly), so those options can get blown off for simpler alternatives. Scaler 2 has been a nice tool for me to regain some focus on the sheer versatility of the piano. There are numerous tutorials online. The GUI is a bit more complex than it appears at first glance, so learning to navigate that right away helps to accelerate the learning curve.

+1 With so many free FX out there, it is often simplest to apply an audio FX to the output of whatever you are doing that doesn't have that feature internally (it is actually fairly common to find missing features you want to use). Automation tracks (for panning) are probably the simplest solution for what you want in this case. Melda has MAutopan as part of their FreeFXBundle (you only need the free version of that), which is worth considering if you want extreme precision on panning (such as every other beat, or even ramping pans around during playback). An FX similar to that allows real-time adjustment to "test things" without having to deal with automation tracks that might not have the granularity you require.

It loads all of the accessible data into the new project. Tracks, busses, etc. Start a new project and drag drop that suspect cwp from the CbB browser onto the track view.

+1, this particular tactic has been employed for years. Macros, batch files, etc., that use a "trusted" program to execute can cause serious issues. As they get discovered/quelled there always seems to be another exploit in the pipeline behind it.