Mark Morgon-Shaw

Yeah none of them are any better then Mercury and I can'tr be doing with incompatbilities if the bakers change stuff

@msmcleod - Any update on above post - not sure if it's a bug or expected ?

I can be on it for 6-8 hrs a day so the default theme is easier on the eyes, I don't want my eyeballs stimulated, it needs to be clear and functional. FWIW I though the old 8.5 style interface was clearer but I am used to it now.

If they use Logic they you're talking to people that paid 50-200% more for their hardware because of how shiny it looks.

Maybe he could get Finneas in to consult ?

It's pretty competitive , I do about 100 tracks per year now

It's a nice idea but being involved in production music as I am with it's short deadlines and volume of tracks required to make decent royalties, the one-size-fits -all solution holds far more appeal because it reduces complexity and I can write-mix-master and export deliverables all in one session ( which is considered best practice in this world ) The thought of relying on inter-dependencies between different DAWs and the potential for something to go wrong brings me out in a cold sweat. I guess that's just my own use case though. I trialled most of the alternative DAWs when I thought SPLAT had gone the way of the Dodo but came to the conclusion that the best DAW is the one you know which is why I continuously campaign for it to improve and pull in more non-legacy users.

I actually work in multiple genres : EDM , Electronica, Hip Hop, Pop, Trailer , Orchestral , Rock , Funk...even Dubstep ? All genres of instrumentals for TV shows.

I have already asked for this as have many others

I don't agree, it doesn't have to be a fundamental change to the existing workflow - They just need to add some much needed tools and update some of the existing ones I'll give you two for starters. Surely the long game is to convert a portion of the Bandlab crowd over to CBB ?

That's nuts, if it needed that much EQ to make it sit I'd use a different piano.

Yeah I'm used to as I've used it since the 90s but I've watched my own kids, their friends and my nieces/nephews make music ( they all seem to be into this Trap / Hip Hop / Pop crossover type stuff ) and they're all pretty audio/loop based in their approach and none of them have taken to Cakewalk. They just find other DAWs "easier" to do what they want to do. They think of audio almost the same way as we used to think of midi and are from the generation where they expect thing s to things to "just work" If they don't get instant results they'll move on to the next thing.

And my point is the Sonar/CBB workflow doesn't cater that well for the largest demographic

It was implicit

The other guy was asking to change the PC EQ to 8 bands which is totally unnecessary ( plus filters ) if one can record and mix properly

There's several VST hosts that let you load up multiple instruments and trigger them from one midi track as well as add FX Bluecats Patchwork is more on the basic side Akai VIP is more complex with preset maps which allows you to find patches using metadata tags

Don't believe everything you read on Google

No you are doing it wrong by over using them and just because you can have as many bands as you want doesn't mean you should. Each EQ band will add some phase shift and the more you stack up the worse it will sound. If a mixer can't make a track sound decent with 4 bands of parametric EQ and a couple of filters then I suspect there's either something wrong with the source material or that person lacks the requisite skills. For the record I use Pro Q-3 which can have up to 21 bands but I don't recall ever using more than the 4 bands +2 filters offered in the Pro Channel, the main reason I use it is it has a much better GUI, M/S and Dynamic EQ .

Infinitely requested in various threads

You missed Garage Band off your list, free with every Mac since 2004

Thanks for the explanation, I still don't seem to have it working 100%. When the Clip Gain filter is active it seems that clicking the Clip Header ( as per your method 1 ) doesn't select the clip if there is a lot of clip gain nodes - it selects the gain nodes below where you clicked. I am talking about a clip with freehand drawn nodes so they are quite dense . Not sure whether this is expected behavior or a bug but it makes it difficult select an individual clip. I can work around the issue by using Method 2 and selecting all the clips in the track but it's not as intuitive as Method 1 and I think any way of reducing extra steps is beneficial to the workflow . I also notice the Split Tool doesn't seem to function either whilst the edit filter is active ? Is this a deliberate design choice as it would be another way of splitting the clips if it was enabled. Personally I find the Smart Tool modifier key pretty handy but it swaps the Split command of Clips Mode for the Draw Tool when using an Edit Filter which is understandable. Going slightly OT maybe there should be a way of having "fixed" Smart Tool Modifiers so they remain constant throughout the UI ? i.e. Alt = remains Context Sensitive as current Press & Hold " s" = Split Tool regardless of Edit Filter Press & Hold "e" = Erase Tool regardless of Edit Filter I understand D for Draw & M for Move are taken but maybe other options PS - I can confirm the bug about it reverting back to clips mode I think was part of the issue as I only had one clip in my test track. Hopefully you can put that on the bug fix list.

Not needed IMHO...what would be the benefit ?

Young people won't naturally gravitate to Cakewalk because the workflow doesn't support how kids are making thier music.

You often need to finesse the velocities and even pull the notes forward or backwards so I'm not sure how much use it would be , I would want notes on the actual PRV