Byron Dickens

Mental illness doesn't justify bad behavior.

This forum has got to be the worst I've ever seen for thread necromancy.

http://amplesound.net/en/pro-pd.asp?id=7

I fully agree! Thumbing own a post shouldn't affect someone's community reputation. "I didn't like your post" is not the same thing as "I don't like you." I don't think it makes any sense that a new person can be given a "poor reputation" because (to make up an example) he started a thread on "IKM moving to subscription model." (They aren't.)

This thread is almost three years old! There's been a lot of changes since then and this might not even be relevant any more.

?

I think it's pretty good as it is actually. Only things I might change, is that at times the two guitars seem like they're competing against each other and I would do something to bring the kick out more. I think in this mix there's probably room for it on the bottom end.

And that's the best case scenario.

If it sounds too good to be true....

Boy am I glad I stopped by. I have one of those sitting around and was going to try using it if and when my hardware options expand. Now I know not to bother.

https://zoomcorp.com/media/documents/E_L-12_4.pdf

You can't get rid of AAX because of Pro Fools. If you want to play ball with Pro Fools, then you got to have AAX. And of course if you're a developer, then you want to play ball with Pro Fools because it's the "industry standard." But yeah, why do you ram it down my throat when I can't decide who I dislike more, Avid or Apple and refuse as much as possible to have anything to do with either one of them. You don't force me to install the AU versions. VST3 is supposed to solve the issue of companies hiding their VST plugins all over your system like they were Easter eggs or something.

Well, that's a question of intellectual property law. If Steinberg had decided to call them Cubase plugins instead of VST plugins, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion about ownership. We would just be thrilled that our DAWs could load them too....

Cakewalk itself is quite a handful for newbies.... ?

Because this same private company invented it. Why? Who's stopping you?

.

Why is it such a big deal to lasso more than one selection?

I believe you can just delete the AAX stuff. I sure hope some of these developers with VST3s prone to crashing CbB get them figured out....

Or this:. https://www.tx16wx.com/

You can't. Closest thing is to use Cntrl. to make multiple selections.

You should put this in the songs subforum. I checked it out. Honestly, I didn't like it that much, but that is just a taste thing. It is very good, just not my style. I thought it was very well done. You know a mix is good when it sounds great on the phone speaker. The intro with those sound effects was interesting. I thought it was really clever how it sets up a radically different set of expectations than what the body of the song is really like. Bringing them back in later gives continuity. What I really liked was the video itself. How did you do the animation? I apologize if I offended you. It can be easy to mistake someone being direct and blunt with him being a d***. That wasn't my intention; we get rashes of people coming on here complaining that CbB is broken - that it doesn't work properly - because they don't get the results they were expecting and they haven't bothered to look at the documentation. Just recently some guy popped in here after playing with Cakewalk for a whole long week with a laundry list of "missing features" that are, in fact, features that CW has had for years. So I do apologize, but your OP did look for all the world like one of those. Some remark along the lines of "I've been using CW for years and this just started happening" would have cleared that right up. No hard feelings? As far as me being wrong, its not the first time and I'm sure it will happen again.

Nah, I'm just not fluent in gibberish. If you don't use technical language correctly you shouldn't really get offended if people don't understand what you're talking about. You have a wonderful evening. I need to get back to my latest project; it just so happens I am adding some crescendos at key points to make the melody more expressive.

Aside from an academic interest, I don't think any of this matters. Its all supposed to be transparent to the user.

There are two conventions, 0-127 and 1-128. Which one is used is determined by the GM instrument, not by CW. You need to use the correct instrument definition for what you have.

Now this has me wondering why someone who knows "which note I place where and why" needs to be dragging them all over the place. Not to mention that even after four semesters of music theory, I have no idea what a "crescendo of half-steps over two octaves" is supposed to be. Nor can I recall having ever experienced stuck notes whilst editing in the PRV.