Clone tracks confusion

I'm a complete newb when it comes to cloning tracks, last night was the first time I ever used this functionality.  I had an instrument track with a test tone generator in the FX bin.  My plan was to create a bunch of tracks each with a test tone generator effect generating different frequencies.  Then I can solo tracks to quickly play different test tones.
 
"I know" I thought, "I'll save myself some time by using the clone tracks feature".  In hindsight, I really should have thought, "I know, I'll waste forty minutes then give up in frustration."
 
So I cloned the track, but muting one track mutes all, and soloing one track solos all.  There's effectively only 1x tone generator instance across all cloned tracks too; editing the tone generator edits the tone generators in all cloned tracks.  Enabling or disabling the effect also affects all tracks.
 
"I know" I thought, "I'll deselect the 'copy effects' checkbox in the clone tracks dialog" but the effect is still cloned/copied(!?) 
 
Can cloned tracks be made independent afterwards?  I guess that's the answer I'm looking for.  Otherwise, to be honest I just don't see the point in them.  If every change you make to one track is equally reflected across all, how is that useful??  I'm really looking to copy and paste tracks as a means to quickly create similar tracks, not generate some weird quantum entanglement effect across them.

Not that I've been able to find.  I've had a look in the help but that just explains the options that are available in the clone track dialog, it doesn't go into any depth about the relationship between cloned tracks. 
 
I remember a recent clone track issue thread on these forums, I'm going to try to find that to see if it helps.
 
[edit] Found it, I think this is what I'm looking for (it sounds like the same issue I was looking for an answer to): http://forum.cakewalk.com/Why-are-mix-controls-on-cloned-instrument-tracks-linked-m2856182.aspx
 
[edit2] Like in the above linked thread, I was using a Simple Instrument Track (SIT).  The weird thing is I tried putting the tone generator in the FX bin of an audio track, but it wouldn't generate any test tones in that arrangement, so I went back to using a SIT. 
 
I also found that although the manual states that a new MIDI track is created when cloning a SIT, linked to the original synth, what I was seeing was a SIT, not a MIDI track.  Cloning just works in a weird way with SITs it seems.  Oh well, I'll give audio tracks another try later on, maybe the DAW gods will smile upon me and they'll work this evening.

Guitarhacker
Inserting a synth track takes about the same length of time as cloning the track.

True, but I was looking to create multiple copies all at once which is what clone tracks allows you to do.  Using audio tracks is the answer for me, I just need to figure out why the tone generator wasn't working in them.
 
I could just use a synth with a sine wave as its oscillator and play sequential semitones at equal velocity I suppose :-)

Ta, I'll give that a try.  [edit: grabbed it now, thanks for the heads up]
 
I was using the one in the MDA (AKA 'smartelectronix') bundle.

This is the real clone tracks confusion....
 

 
I know a workaround....so never mind....

ston
Not that I've been able to find.  I've had a look in the help but that just explains the options that are available in the clone track dialog, it doesn't go into any depth about the relationship between cloned tracks. 
 
I remember a recent clone track issue thread on these forums, I'm going to try to find that to see if it helps.
 
[edit] Found it, I think this is what I'm looking for (it sounds like the same issue I was looking for an answer to): http://forum.cakewalk.com/Why-are-mix-controls-on-cloned-instrument-tracks-linked-m2856182.aspx
 
[edit2] Like in the above linked thread, I was using a Simple Instrument Track (SIT).  The weird thing is I tried putting the tone generator in the FX bin of an audio track, but it wouldn't generate any test tones in that arrangement, so I went back to using a SIT. 
 
I also found that although the manual states that a new MIDI track is created when cloning a SIT, linked to the original synth, what I was seeing was a SIT, not a MIDI track.  Cloning just works in a weird way with SITs it seems.  Oh well, I'll give audio tracks another try later on, maybe the DAW gods will smile upon me and they'll work this evening.

Well, since a SIT is a combination of midi and audio, I would think that if trying it with regular audio tracks that you would also need to create a copy of your midi track, if you are expecting midi to be producing sound for that audio track.
 
I am though a bit confused as to what you are trying to do with audio tracks, since it appears that you are really expecting to clone midi data.  Perhaps you could take another stab at explaining.  (I will go back and read the earlier posts again, as I likely just missed something).
 
If your goal is to have an additional audio track playing the sound generated from an existing MIDI track, would it work for you to just create one or more additional AUDIO tracks, then set their inputs to the output of the synth that is attached to the existing MIDI track?  That would allow you to set up different effect chains for each audio track, if that is your goal.
 
Just a thought, 
 
Bob Bone
 

So it is up and running for you?  If so, WAHOO!
 
Bob Bone
 

brundlefly

ston
Ah...I have now figured out why!  The audio track needs to have Input Echo enabled, but the SIT track doesn't.  That's a little odd perhaps; if an audio track has a synth, and you drive it via MIDI, Input Echo does not need to be enabled to hear the synth.
 

It makes sense because there's normally never a need to not echo the output of a soft synth because its output is dead silent when it's not being driven by MIDI input, and it can't be direct-monitored. So assigning the input of an Audio track to a soft synth automatically makes it an Instrument track that has no Input Echo button.

 
That's not quite what I was thinking of.  I was talking about when a synth is inserted into an audio track's FX bin, not when the track's input is set to the output of a synth.  In this case it's still an audio track not an instrument track isn't it?

Well, the results of working out where the hell my monitors are at exactly with respect to frequency response are in.
 
Here's a picture of the stack of parametrics that I've come up with to correct them (holy EQ curves Batman!)  Order is top->down, left->right.  The Channel Tools is just for a couple db makeup gain.
 

 
I've been using the following to judge the results:

Set of 4x reference tones from Danelec's website (bass staircase, continual frequency sweep, pink noise, 85Hz reference), bass staircase from SOS's website, MDA's Tone Generator, MeldaProduction's MOscillator (really useful that) and various well mastered music tracks.  I've got the response as flat as I can now using EQ, there's still a little dip centered around 90 hz or so but the filters start ringing if I try to tweak that region any more.
 
The difference is staggering.  I wonder how much is due to my room (it's just my bedroom with no acoustic treatment) and how much is the monitors not being quite as flat as claimed?
 
I even found out that A#3 was making the mains plug/socket resonate on the right hand monitor, not sure if there's anything I can tighten up there but perhaps just using a different lead might help.