Bill Phillips

Thanks @John Vere! I'm going to do that, starting slowly. I'm also working on an old laptop installing Cakewalk and plugins for someone else. That's one of the reasons I ended up with so many plugins. For them, I'm trying to get to around 100 FX plugins and excluding the ones I don't think they'll need will be a good way to avoid uninstalling and reinstalling as I waffle.

Thanks @msmcleod. So that's it. I have more than 1,000 plugins and noticed the change but didn't think twice about it. When I didn't see the fly out, I guess I clicked the "Insert Audio FX" line in the menu which opened a new plugin selection window. and went on from there.

Some, like ToneBoosters have more flexible installers that support Install/Uninstall and changes in the plugins installed. I just finished uninstalling ToneBooster plugins I installed by mistake and installed the older versions which are free using The ToneBooster installer and found it handled partial installs and uninstalls pretty well.

Thanks. I'm going to check that out.

I agree ? As for the rest, I think, we're both looking at the same Elephant from different ends and describing what we see. And what we see is different, but it's still an Elephant. ?

@msmcleod thank you for explaining. I'm not saying that wave editors don't change the wave files and that the rendered clip will reflect those changes, AFAIK, in the same way that Cakewalk does. When you are using a wave editor what you are editing is the wave file. But Melodyne, as far as I can tell, is different. It's not a wave editor. Melodyne uses an algorithm to convert the wave file into the blobs and lines you see and edit in the Melodyne editor. It's the blobs and lines, not the wave file, that you are editing. When you're done in Melodyne, the blobs and lines are processed by an algorithm to create the rendered wave file. So, I don't think that Melodyne is a wave editor even though it's used instead to a wave editor to do the same job probably easier and better as @John Vere said.

I haven't used either wave editors or Melodyne very much. I'm just trying to understand. I have considered them (wave editors and Melodyne) to be two different things ( one where you cut/paste/fade/drag/re-draw existing wave files and the other where you are editing audio [not waveforms] and then rendering a new wave file). Which leads to the question: Is the wave file permanently changed or replaced? It appears to me that Melodyne uses an algorithm to create the replacement clip. Whereas, a clip editor returns the original clip as edited by you as long as no pitch or tempo stretching were applied. pitch changes and tempo stretching would produce a replacement clip.

I think I understand that you're saying Melodyne is the best at producing the results that were historically achieved using wave editors. But Melodyne is not, AFAIK, a wave editor. I believe that Melodyne translates wave files to blobs connected by lines that are a metaphor representing the audio. In Melodyne you are editing audio, not the wave file. When you're done and bounce the clip, Melodyne translates the final blob sequence into a new wave file, not an edited one.

Translation please. What does that mean?

On 4/18/2023 at 3:41 PM, John Balich said: fo und it..much mo' betta What does that mean?

Did you mean Acon Acoustica 6? If yes, looks like it's been upgraded to Acoustica 7 which is no longer free.

Why?

Thanks, but no-thanks.

Thanks @John Vere

Nope. I'm not dead yet.? But I did solve that problem.

Where does the ISRC code go?

Thanks John, I'll stick with the Melodyne method. That is good news. Thanks Mark. I'm sold; keep using Melodyne.

I'm going to try it. Thanks. I use Melodyne too, and have had very few problems. Most of the songs I mix are vocal and acoustic guitar only. So not very complicated. My only complaint is that I get dozens of really small tempo changes. I'm thinking the AudioSnap method will allow me to drastically reduce the number of tempo change. Not sure which will work best with tempo based FX, but hope to find out.

Fast beat.

Actually, @Lynn Wilson's suggestion works fine for me. Though this thread is over 3-years old, and I think there have been some improvements in the Melodyne - Cakewalk interface made since then.

I'll give them a try.

Unless there are no IRs for the guitar you have

I still haven't done any research on this but here's a long, and a little dated, thread by folks who apparently have. @msmcleod starts the discussion saying that the 3 Sigma Audio IR's are made for use on any acoustic guitar which is why i decided to buy the one i mentioned in my earlier post on this tthread.

I know nothing about acoustic guitar IRs or IR loaders. So, when I wanted something to use for mixing acoustic guitar DI tracks I record, I remembered someone, on this forum I thing, recommended 3 Sigma Audio Gibs-45 IRs. I bought those and the 3 Sigma Audio Impulsive IR loader VST. I've been generally happy with them. I haven't really tried any other acoustic guitar IRs. I did try using Ignite Amps free NadIR loader which works fine but doesn't seem to work as well on my 3 Sigma Audio Gibs-45 IRs as 3 Sigma's Impulsive.

But the momentary pop up if there is one tells you to "Keep on doing what you're doing." ?