Little suggestions for Cakewalk

[Some Guy]

That post (that you're replying g to) was so patronizing, dismissive, and passive aggressive...

I applaud you for your measured response. 

"Community" definitely isn't a selling point for this product. 

[chuckebaby]

7 hours ago, SomeGuy said:

That post (that you're replying g to) was so patronizing, dismissive, and passive aggressive...

Both you and I can be opinionated at times, both you and I can also be rough around the edges sometimes as well.

7 hours ago, SomeGuy said:

"Community" definitely isn't a selling point for this product. 

With many users, comes many different views. This community/forum has the best turn over (question/answer) rate of any DAW on the net.

7 hours ago, SomeGuy said:

I applaud you for your measured response. 

I do agree with you on that.

Edited September 8, 2019 by Chuck E Baby

[MarianoGF]

With "multiple mixers" he means that the inspector and the consolé expanded at the same time seem to be a confusing one. I agree on that. I think it shouldn't be able to see the inspector while the console is expanded, at least when docked.

I think the 5th point regarding to "the quality of time stretching" being low, is old. It WAS low, but it has been improved a lot with the addition of elastique technology. Check that again.

[John]

56 minutes ago, Mariano Germán Flores said:

With "multiple mixers" he means that the inspector and the consolé expanded at the same time seem to be a confusing one. I agree on that. I think it shouldn't be able to see the inspector while the console is expanded, at least when docked.

I think the 5th point regarding to "the quality of time stretching" being low, is old. It WAS low, but it has been improved a lot with the addition of elastique technology. Check that again.

That is interesting.  I have to admit because I use dual monitors that was never a problem for me. By the way the Inspector can be minimized. It also is useful for the Pro Channel.  If you do MIDI it is vital. The idea of the Skylight GUI was to make single monitor systems such as laptops better to use and get around in. 

It threw me because Cubase does have 3 mixers. To my knowledge no other DAW does.  

[chuckebaby]

2 hours ago, Mariano Germán Flores said:

he means that the inspector and the consolé expanded at the same time seem to be a confusing one

I can understand what your saying there. However having an open inspector allows for editing things you normally cant do in console view.

like this...

It also allows you to have a full size Pro Channel without having to expand every track in the Console View.

Like this....

And as @John mentioned it can be collapsed/minimized (and even closed) if users prefer not to work in such a manner.

We all work so differently, im just glad Cakewalk is deep in Multi-Docking functions so we can all work the way we enjoy to.

I personally have Project templates set up with saved screensets to work the same way every time I open Cakewalk. It allows me to work with the layout I want and that's all that really matters to each of us.

[Starship Krupa]

On 9/7/2019 at 10:13 AM, Chuck E Baby said:

You seem to have the same issue as I do sometimes with the feedback section of this forum. you tend to not totally grip a users requests for what we deem to be absurdities.

I try to be sympathetic, and I am far, far from a "pro" user. I only started using Cakewalk by BandLab in April 2018.

One scenario I dislike myself and try to avoid is being a Feature Request Apologist, where someone makes a good feature request and I respond with some convoluted workaround. I at least try to acknowledge that it's a reasonable feature request and that what I'm suggesting is a way to soldier through for now, not a way of saying that their request is unnecessary. ?

It's often hard not to do that with Cakewalk because it's such a deep program and there are many ways to do things.

I this case, however, I lost my cool, because the gentleman in question seemed to go out of his way to self-sabotage by trying to "fix" things, copying what he thought were installation files from various locations on one computer to other places and running them. Then when this resulted in a damaged installation, he responded to it with multiple suggestions that the current licensing and authentication model be "substituted" with pop-up ads at start time as some kind of trade-off. I ignored the first couple but he kept at it.

Is the idea that we're somehow paying for the program in Annoyance, and rather than paying in one lump sum, it would be better to pay it off in small amounts over a long period of time? I don't know. I'm unclear on the concept.

Unfortunately, BandLab support, which is where the issue should end, has been unable to undo this specific user's mess, but in the meantime, I maintain that the answer to the occasional  authorization failure is not to "replace" authorization with pop-up notifications at start time. They do not serve the same or even a similar purpose. If users who experience authorization failures contact support, best case scenario is that the mechanism can be made more robust if it needs to be. If support knows there are issues and what they are, development will be informed.

I'm one of the lucky vast majority who's never had a problem, but I can see where it would be really bad news if it happened at the wrong time. I have noticed from watching the forum that it seems to only happen at install time, not for Cakewalk installations that have already successfully authenticated, so there doesn't appear to be much danger of demo mode happening during a critical session.

Edited September 8, 2019 by Starship Krupa

[Starship Krupa]

10 hours ago, Mariano Germán Flores said:

With "multiple mixers" he means that the inspector and the consolé expanded at the same time seem to be a confusing one. I agree on that.

Ohhhh. Maybe I got that wrong. Well, maybe not. I did get into trouble a few times with having more than one project open and "mixing" the wrong one! I tried to figure out how Efrem might have possibly been seeing "multiple mixers" and that was all I could think of.

I also agree that at first having those duplicate channel strips off to the left of the Track View was confusing, and it made things seem cluttered. All I really use it for now is advanced MIDI stuff like the arpeggiator. The rest of the time it stays collapsed.

That is an unfortunate issue with the default layout of Cakewalk: when I first opened it, it looked "busy" and cluttered. Then I figured out what I could leave collapsed most of the time and I run with a much cleaner view now.

But if you give new users a "clean" layout they will not know that all these features exist. The Inspector isn't a bad thing, as long as you know that you can keep it closed most of the time. It's handy when you have a 15" screen laptop and you want to use ProChannel.

[Efrem C.'79]

When you open the Pro-Channel you create a double mixer channel ... and I think it clutters the mixer section even more ... For me It would be better to leave a single channel, simpler and "cleaner", subsequently adding other professional effects and various plugins that are in the pro-channel ? Regarding the - Theme Editor - I believe that those who make music must concentrate on music ... The theme editor is a job for the graphic designer ... A musician cannot "waste time" modifying the graphics of a program, but can only give some suggestions to ensure that at least the size of the software is resizable, orderly, less dense in icons and (repeated) functions, easy to understand and as comprehensible as possible...

Not for advertise other software though, if you look at Studio One it looks very "clean" not so full of features ... Then on each file, with the right mouse button, you can work on the various aspects ... I try to to give an example: if I load an audio file in a track I can (with the right mouse button) reverse the track, insert the channels, change to the same tonality of the track lowering by several semi-tones, normalize, Etc .. Etc .. I think the right mouse button should have more features ... For example, time-stretching in Cakewalk only gives a percentage change but I can't find the function to see how many BPM tracks change, which in Studio One I can know well...

Thank.

Edited September 11, 2019 by Efrem C.'79

[User 905133]

2 hours ago, Efrem C.'79 said:

The theme editor is a job for the graphic designer ... A musician cannot "waste time" modifying the graphics of a program, but can only give some suggestions to ensure that at least the size of the software is resizable, orderly, less dense in icons and (repeated) functions, easy to understand and as comprehensible as possible.

For me, the  customizability of Cakewalk is a blessing.  I don't regret having spent the time modifying the graphics to meet my specific visual needs. Having re-sizable fonts would not have helped me.  I had already lowered the size of my monitor's resolution to make everything bigger. Using collapsed modules on the Control Bar with my easy-for-me-to-see  graphics allows me to do music again!!!! 

As for clutter, Cakewalk has long had many features/options for making the work space as cluttered or as  basic as many different users want at different times to meet specific needs. You can have single components of the software cover an entire monitor or even spread out over several monitors. 

I have found for me having a small synth rack pane allows me to open/select various softsynths which I often place on a second monitor with a different resolution than my main Cakewalk display.  

I would really hate to see Cakewalk get rid of its flexibility.  

BTW, at a time when I thought Cakewalk was gone for good, I bought another DAW  (highly recommended by many user from what I have seen) and despite many hours of problem solving, it was never able to give me  access to the full range of my sound card's ASIO I/O channels like Cakewalk does.

Not every DAW is for everyone.    

On 9/4/2019 at 6:38 PM, MusicMan11712 (aka Dr. Steve) said:

I know you said you are " . . . not interested in addressing or having feedback . . . ." However, you do not seem to be just writing notes for yourself, you are proclaiming what you think is wrong with Cakewalk in a public forum. 

Perhaps I am the only one customizing Cakewalk's visual elements to accommodate a vision impairment, but for me the Theme Editor is a  blessing. Likewise, I have found the customizing abilities of Lenses very helpful in organizing Cakewalk workspaces--from very easy to see what's there (simple/basic) to cluttered, but I know where everything is (advanced).

I have only recently started using the Theme Editor, but even with lowering my monitor's resolution (i.e., making everything bigger thereby taking up more space), I have found I can change the control bar to make it work for me. See examples below.

For some people, tweaking track icons might be helpful. For others, different customizations might be helpful. For my eyes having the names of tracks based on type (MIDI, Audio, etc.) in different colors is more efficient. 

 

Edited September 11, 2019 by MusicMan11712 (aka Dr. Steve)
To reference previous post on this issue

[User 905133]

On 9/8/2019 at 7:42 PM, Starship Krupa said:

That is an unfortunate issue with the default layout of Cakewalk: when I first opened it, it looked "busy" and cluttered. Then I figured out what I could leave collapsed most of the time and I run with a much cleaner view now.

Good point, IMO.  I know I tend to be overwhelmed by new things (e.g., software) but once I take things step-at-a-time (i.e., getting over the initial humps on the learning curve--which often looks so steep I doubt I will make it) I find the knowledge I have gained through the process becomes second nature.  Once on that plateau for a while, I am rested enough from climbing to venture up the higher hills of complexity.  

Based on your observation, I am wondering if just like users can choose from a variety of templates for new projects, perhaps first time users can be given a choice of starting places for their initial Cakewalk Desktop.  And perhaps (to borrow from a different thread) beginners (and others) can choose to opt-in for automatic tips ([  ]once a day, [  ] at launch, [  ] after idling for ____ minutes, [  ] never).

Perhaps based on the first use and the response given, the configuration might default to a sort-of-basic lens with the first tip being something like "Since you self-identified as a first-time user, Cakewalk has been configured to start with a beginner's 'Lens.'  You can change to a more advanced lens or choose other "Screen Sets" to completely customize your Cakewalk Desktop."

Maybe tips for first-time users could be on by default.

Perhaps a one-at-a-time Tips Viewer could be integrated into BandLab Assistant, rather than bringing them back into Cakewalk.

Just saying that there are things that could be done to make the learning curve less initially daunting for new users--so they are not overwhelmed, frustrated, agitated, turned off, etc. Who knows, maybe the good people at BandLab are already working on it. 

Sample tips from Sonar 3 (yes, extremely outdated, but IMO easy to update--from the reference guide, on-line documentations, and maybe even from the many excellent power user tips in thus forum):

[Jim Fogle]

The idea of a beginner's lens or screen set is a good idea in my opinion.

One idea I think worth deeper investigation is lens based on experience level and screen sets by function.  By that I mean different lens for beginner, apprentice, journeyman, craftsman, master and user lens with each lens adding more features.  Each lens would have 10 customizable screen sets like present with the defaults based on daw centrist functions like (1) Audio Tracking (2) Midi 2 Audio (3) Loops (4) Editing (5) Mixing (6) Mastering (7) Distribution and user screen sets.

[Starship Krupa]

On 9/11/2019 at 1:59 AM, Efrem C.'79 said:

The theme editor is a job for the graphic designer ... A musician cannot "waste time" modifying the graphics of a program

There is no reason to get rid of the Theme Editor, because its only function is to allow the user to make changes to the program's appearance.

No user is forced to use Theme Editor. Most Cakewalk users don't, most users only ever use the Mercury and Tungsten themes. Theme Editor is not even part of the default installation. If a user wants to make changes to the default colors, there is a more direct way to do that in Preferences.

It was originally only intended for use by in-house developers, then polished up and released for end users to use if they chose. I think the ability to create and alter themes/skins is wonderful and I am involved in it in a small way, doing my own alterations and participating in discussions when I can contribute.

Theme Editor has nothing to do with interface scalability, that is a completely separate issue.

On 9/11/2019 at 1:59 AM, Efrem C.'79 said:

with the right mouse button, you can work on the various aspects

Yes, I agree that right-click context menus are a very good way to access operations. That was the original intention of the right mouse button in the Windows 95 UI. I was working at Macromedia when Microsoft introduced Windows 95 and was trying to get companies used to the idea of how to use a right mouse button. If your program has any kind of object, a block of text, a picture, an equation, a sound file, whatever, to make changes to it you place your cursor on the object and click the right mouse button. I got it right away and became the world's fastest right-clicker. I was in QA and if they gave me a program to try out and it didn't have right-click context menu functionality I would march into the project manager's cube with eyes rolled and tell them that their stupid Macintosh Cmd-click stuff was history, that in a couple of years people would be hooking multiple button mice up to their Macs, etc.

IMO, every operation pertinent to that area of the screen should be available on the context menu. Especially processing. Select a region, right click, boom.

21 hours ago, MusicMan11712 (aka Dr. Steve) said:

as a first-time user, Cakewalk has been configured to start with a beginner's 'Lens.'  You can change to a more advanced lens or choose other "Screen Sets" to completely customize your Cakewalk Desktop."

This has been discussed, and @Craig Anderton has said that one of the original functions of Lenses was to "hide" or "reveal" features for proposed different versions of Cakewalk. Logic has Basic and Advanced views and defaults to the Basic view on first run. The Start Screen would be a good place to choose a Basic or Advanced view.

It just needs to be "sold" to TPTB and then someone needs to design the Lenses. I think Basic/Advanced views is a great idea and would love to see it implemented. This is one we can say is "easy to do," because it's just a couple of lenses. But then the question needs to be answered: what does the Basic view of Cakewalk look like?

[chuckebaby]

4 hours ago, Starship Krupa said:

It was originally only intended for use by in-house developers, then polished up and released for end users to use if they chose.

+1 to that.

This was a feature Cakewalk gifted to its user base because multiple users (more like 100's) Asked for it.

that's one thing ive noticed about Cakewalk as of late, They are listening to their user base more now than ever before. they always did take user input into consideration but now it appears they are giving the users every thing they want. That is not something you see by every developer of software now a day.

[Frank Cheney]

On 9/8/2019 at 4:18 PM, Starship Krupa said:

I try to be sympathetic, and I am far, far from a "pro" user. I only started using Cakewalk by BandLab in April 2018.

One scenario I dislike myself and try to avoid is being a Feature Request Apologist, where someone makes a good feature request and I respond with some convoluted workaround. I at least try to acknowledge that it's a reasonable feature request and that what I'm suggesting is a way to soldier through for now, not a way of saying that their request is unnecessary. ?

It's often hard not to do that with Cakewalk because it's such a deep program and there are many ways to do things.

I this case, however, I lost my cool, because the gentleman in question seemed to go out of his way to self-sabotage by trying to "fix" things, copying what he thought were installation files from various locations on one computer to other places and running them. Then when this resulted in a damaged installation, he responded to it with multiple suggestions that the current licensing and authentication model be "substituted" with pop-up ads at start time as some kind of trade-off. I ignored the first couple but he kept at it.

Is the idea that we're somehow paying for the program in Annoyance, and rather than paying in one lump sum, it would be better to pay it off in small amounts over a long period of time? I don't know. I'm unclear on the concept.

Unfortunately, BandLab support, which is where the issue should end, has been unable to undo this specific user's mess, but in the meantime, I maintain that the answer to the occasional  authorization failure is not to "replace" authorization with pop-up notifications at start time. They do not serve the same or even a similar purpose. If users who experience authorization failures contact support, best case scenario is that the mechanism can be made more robust if it needs to be. If support knows there are issues and what they are, development will be informed.

I'm one of the lucky vast majority who's never had a problem, but I can see where it would be really bad news if it happened at the wrong time. I have noticed from watching the forum that it seems to only happen at install time, not for Cakewalk installations that have already successfully authenticated, so there doesn't appear to be much danger of demo mode happening during a critical session.

You use perjoritive insults like "go out of his way to self-sabotage" and "this specific user's mess".

No registration regimen is perfect, and when the Bandlab system did not work,

on an otherwise well working system, I took normal and reasonable steps as workarounds,

that do work on some products.

There is no mess, as uninstallation is trivial for experienced users.

Uninstalling an attitude of superiority, is far more difficult.  I think my suggestions

would simplify bandlab coding expenses in the long run, , with win 10 spinning oddly,

and a new mac system with major changes imminent.

Many potential users balk at the appearance of account creation and registration

being required for a 'free' product, IK and NI, among others, catch a fair amount of flack

with their free product requirements. Which for the record, do work in my systems.

[chuckebaby]

I think everyone has behaved themselves accordingly, however the risks of arguments are becoming elevated.

This thread is locked.