Helpful ReplyMe patiently waiting for Track to Track Routing in Sonar

Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Author
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/26 14:56:40 (permalink)
That looks pretty fuxxored as well but I'm sure quite logical if I understood it. At least it looks reasonably compact though. I've envisioned all sorts of crazy matrices for Sonar but I'm a n00b so I can't even begin to mentally plot all the intricacies. I just know sometimes I think to myself "This project is huge and a gatdanged mess... I wish I could open a window and look at WTF I did here and send/insert things where I ACTUALLY want them to go/be".
 
It's the MIDI thing I think that dorks it out too much for me. Audio is easy for me to figure out (kind of).
#31
xbitz
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 30
  • Joined: 2015/07/24 23:55:28
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/26 15:00:31 (permalink) ☄ Helpfulby John T 2015/08/26 20:09:03
anyway I hope it will be better than this 



http://stash.reaper.fm/23836/Capture.JPG
post edited by xbitz - 2015/08/26 15:09:35
#32
streckfus
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 339
  • Joined: 2013/11/22 15:29:47
  • Location: Minneapolis, MN
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/26 15:10:33 (permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Virtual patch points do away with the need for extra "aux tracks". The patch point is essentially like using a patch bay where you can patch any number of tracks or buses to it and then "connect" the patch point output to another track (or bus). If its patched to a track you can then record that tracks patchpoint input just like it was a hardware input.
The feature is in development so any or all of this might change :)


Ooohh, I'm liking the sound of that.  So essentially - knowing full well that since it's under development nothing is set in stone at this point - this "virtual patch bay" approach would completely open up routing flexibility and allow for a variety of functions, whether it be "printing" a mixbus to a new audio track, recording a soft synth, routing two tracks to a single track (such as a top mic track and bottom mic track both patched to a main "Snare" track) thereby allowing for FX processing on that new track, which could then be routed to a drum bus, etc.?
 
And of course these would live in the track pane since it's essentially just another audio track but with this new patch point capability?

Sonar Platinum | Win 10 Pro/64-bit | Core i7-6700K | 32GB DDR4 2400 RAM | ASUS Z170-AR | ASUS GeForce GTX 970 | Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 | Yamaha HS8s
#33
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/26 15:12:08 (permalink)
Almost looks like one of those "Thought Cloud" thingies that make me nervous about the thought processes of young people destined to control our world as I age (essentially my dumbass generation).
 
I am a firm advocate for chaos and intellectual freedom/experimentation... but in the sense you draw it down and organize it logically, linearly and in a realistically executable manner in the real world (which is governed by mathematics/physics no matter how desperately you try to reject those truisms).
 
Columns, lines and easily manipulated numbers were invented for a reason and have served those reasons well.
 
/getting old and cranky
#34
Beepster
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 18001
  • Joined: 2012/05/11 19:11:24
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/26 15:12:09 (permalink)
dupe...
 
*yells at cloud*
post edited by Beepster - 2015/08/26 15:20:31
#35
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
  • Total Posts : 6475
  • Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
  • Location: Boston, MA, USA
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/26 20:30:58 (permalink)
streckfus
Ooohh, I'm liking the sound of that.  So essentially - knowing full well that since it's under development nothing is set in stone at this point - this "virtual patch bay" approach would completely open up routing flexibility and allow for a variety of functions, whether it be "printing" a mixbus to a new audio track, recording a soft synth, routing two tracks to a single track (such as a top mic track and bottom mic track both patched to a main "Snare" track) thereby allowing for FX processing on that new track, which could then be routed to a drum bus, etc.?
 
And of course these would live in the track pane since it's essentially just another audio track but with this new patch point capability?



No strip is required to represent virtual patch points. They show up just like input or output ports in the menus.
You can also create groups of tracks routed to other tracks like what you described since the patchpoint knows how to mix. However I don't see the immediate advantage of your example since its probably simpler to use a normal bus to do that. You can also use it to record the metronome bus or to record a submix stem without needing to bounce it.

Noel Borthwick
Senior Manager Audio Core, BandLab
My Blog, Twitter, BandLab Profile
#36
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 6783
  • Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/26 20:53:49 (permalink)
I think I'm having a stupid day today, as I'm not quite grasping what this is at the moment. I think probably the main question I have is "how is this different to a bus?"
 
I mean, it obviously is, but I'm not quite understanding what's being said, I think.

http://johntatlockaudio.com/
Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
#37
streckfus
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 339
  • Joined: 2013/11/22 15:29:47
  • Location: Minneapolis, MN
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/26 21:28:14 (permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
 
No strip is required to represent virtual patch points. They show up just like input or output ports in the menus.
You can also create groups of tracks routed to other tracks like what you described since the patchpoint knows how to mix. However I don't see the immediate advantage of your example since its probably simpler to use a normal bus to do that. You can also use it to record the metronome bus or to record a submix stem without needing to bounce it.



The advantage would be for those of us who don't like the separation between tracks/busses.  For example, I like to keep the number of busses fairly minimal: instrument groups (drums, guitars, vox, mixbus, reverb, etc.).  Since the bottom mic and top mic both contribute to the snare sound, it would be nice to have a main "Snare" track right there next to the top/bottom mic tracks in the track view.  Or if I want to do parallel compression in a track, I can route the source signal to a track right next to it.  When the track count increases, side-scrolling the separate track/bus sections gets a little tedious.
 
There have been a few requests for giving users the option to move tracks/busses freely as opposed to having them "locked" inside individual panes, so I think (for those of us interested in such a thing) our thought process was that track-to-track routing would allow for an "aux" track of sorts, thereby allowing us to organize tracks/busses as we like.
 
So functionally there's nothing wrong with Sonar's existing track/bus structure.  We certainly can route tracks to busses, busses to busses, etc. to our heart's content, but it can get a bit unorganized, especially when we prefer to organize/group busses in the way I described.  So yeah, more of a convenience thing than a "problem" with the way Sonar currently works.
 
I imagine creating an option to select "Tracks & Busses - One Pane" or "Tracks & Busses - Separate Panes" would probably require a major UI overhaul, and for those who like the setup as is, it doesn't make sense to get rid of the separate track/bus panes altogether, which is why when I saw "Track-to-Track Routing" as an upcoming feature I was seeing it as a way to, in essence, use an audio track as a bus, kind of a hack for those of us who'd like to be able to move tracks/busses freely within a single console pane.
 
I totally get the ability to record/print a synth, track, etc. without having to bounce it, so it'll be a nice feature regardless.  But I initially saw this as a clever way to bypass the limitation of having tracks/busses in separate panes.
 
I did see in an earlier thread about using a plugin with a sidechain input to effectively turn a track into a bus so perhaps I'll look more closely at that.  Or perhaps I'll submit a feature request to allow users to determine whether tracks/busses are organized in separate panes or move tracks/busses freely between panes, but that would require a pretty big overhaul behind the scenes, wouldn't it?  I'd think being able to send a signal from one audio track to another would be a bit less daunting...but I'm no developer so what do I know. :)

Sonar Platinum | Win 10 Pro/64-bit | Core i7-6700K | 32GB DDR4 2400 RAM | ASUS Z170-AR | ASUS GeForce GTX 970 | Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 | Yamaha HS8s
#38
BillWatkins
Max Output Level: -88 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 101
  • Joined: 2009/09/18 21:31:33
  • Location: Charlottesville, Virginia
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/27 19:49:05 (permalink)
Oh my gosh....patch points, batch bay.... i' gonna feel like I'm back at Criteria again ! :)

Sonar Platinum-2016.05
Custom Allegro Technology QuietDAW - Intel Core i7 2600 Quad Core CPU 3.4 GHz on an Asus P8P67 Rev 3.0 motherboard, MS Win 7 Home Premium 64 bit, 16 GB Patriot RAM, eVGA 1 GB Silent Video Card, SIIG 2 port Firewire 1394a PCIe Card, Seagate 500 GB SATA 6 Gb/s (O/S & Programs), Seagate 1 TB SATA 6 Gb/s (Audio), Seagate 1 TB SATA 6 Gb/s (Stream/Samples),Seagate 1 TB SATA 6 Gb/s (internal backup),Sony DVD-RW Lightscribe, LogisysCS4801BK 4U Rackmount case, OCZ StealthXStream 700 W PSU
#39
bluzdog
Max Output Level: -56 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 1928
  • Joined: 2007/10/06 17:15:14
  • Location: Lakewood, Colorado
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/27 23:05:27 (permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
streckfus
Ooohh, I'm liking the sound of that.  So essentially - knowing full well that since it's under development nothing is set in stone at this point - this "virtual patch bay" approach would completely open up routing flexibility and allow for a variety of functions, whether it be "printing" a mixbus to a new audio track, recording a soft synth, routing two tracks to a single track (such as a top mic track and bottom mic track both patched to a main "Snare" track) thereby allowing for FX processing on that new track, which could then be routed to a drum bus, etc.?
 
And of course these would live in the track pane since it's essentially just another audio track but with this new patch point capability?



No strip is required to represent virtual patch points. They show up just like input or output ports in the menus.
You can also create groups of tracks routed to other tracks like what you described since the patchpoint knows how to mix. However I don't see the immediate advantage of your example since its probably simpler to use a normal bus to do that. You can also use it to record the metronome bus or to record a submix stem without needing to bounce it.




I like the way this sounds (no pun).
 
Rocky
#40
Doktor Avalanche
Max Output Level: -32.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 4294
  • Joined: 2015/03/26 18:02:02
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/28 06:16:01 (permalink)
I tell you what I would like to see.
A dockable form dedicated to just input and output routing (and other routing). Maybe have a show/hide tickbox option to show the plugins within.

The current method of selecting Input/output routing (etc) can continue as per usual, this is in addition.

It would be VERY useful to see all the routing at a glance, on one screen, without all the other information in the way. Call it an editable summary screen.
post edited by Doktor Avalanche - 2015/08/28 06:24:58

Sonar Platinum(64 bit),Win 8.1(64 bit),Saffire Pro 40(Firewire),Mix Control = 3.6,Firewire=VIA,Dell Studio XPS 8100(Intel Core i7 CPU 2.93 Ghz/16 Gb),2 x 1TB SSD (Samsung EVO 850),GeForce GTX 460,Yamaha DGX-505 keyboard,Roland A-300PRO,Roland SPD-30 V2,FD-8,Triggera Krigg,Shure SM7B,Yamaha HS5. Rap Pro,Maschine Studio+Komplete 9 Ultimate+Kontrol Z1,Addictive Keys,Waves Silver,Izotope Nectar elements,Overloud Bundle,Geist,Acronis True Image 2015.
#41
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
  • Total Posts : 6475
  • Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
  • Location: Boston, MA, USA
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/28 07:06:16 (permalink)
streckfus
The advantage would be for those of us who don't like the separation between tracks/busses.  For example, I like to keep the number of busses fairly minimal: instrument groups (drums, guitars, vox, mixbus, reverb, etc.).  Since the bottom mic and top mic both contribute to the snare sound, it would be nice to have a main "Snare" track right there next to the top/bottom mic tracks in the track view.  Or if I want to do parallel compression in a track, I can route the source signal to a track right next to it.  When the track count increases, side-scrolling the separate track/bus sections gets a little tedious.
 
There have been a few requests for giving users the option to move tracks/busses freely as opposed to having them "locked" inside individual panes, so I think (for those of us interested in such a thing) our thought process was that track-to-track routing would allow for an "aux" track of sorts, thereby allowing us to organize tracks/busses as we like.
 
So functionally there's nothing wrong with Sonar's existing track/bus structure.  We certainly can route tracks to busses, busses to busses, etc. to our heart's content, but it can get a bit unorganized, especially when we prefer to organize/group busses in the way I described.  So yeah, more of a convenience thing than a "problem" with the way Sonar currently works.
 
I imagine creating an option to select "Tracks & Busses - One Pane" or "Tracks & Busses - Separate Panes" would probably require a major UI overhaul, and for those who like the setup as is, it doesn't make sense to get rid of the separate track/bus panes altogether, which is why when I saw "Track-to-Track Routing" as an upcoming feature I was seeing it as a way to, in essence, use an audio track as a bus, kind of a hack for those of us who'd like to be able to move tracks/busses freely within a single console pane.
 
I totally get the ability to record/print a synth, track, etc. without having to bounce it, so it'll be a nice feature regardless.  But I initially saw this as a clever way to bypass the limitation of having tracks/busses in separate panes.
 
I did see in an earlier thread about using a plugin with a sidechain input to effectively turn a track into a bus so perhaps I'll look more closely at that.  Or perhaps I'll submit a feature request to allow users to determine whether tracks/busses are organized in separate panes or move tracks/busses freely between panes, but that would require a pretty big overhaul behind the scenes, wouldn't it?  I'd think being able to send a signal from one audio track to another would be a bit less daunting...but I'm no developer so what do I know. :)




Thanks for your well thought out response. Indeed patch points would allow you to work exclusively in the track pane if you choose to do so. Tracks are actually a superset of buses in SONAR so there is no reason why you couldn't route one track to another aux track via a patchpoint and do your mixing there if thats what you prefer.
Something like this:
Track 1 ------\
Track 2 ------ Patchpoint 1 ---- Aux Track ---> Master
Track 3 ------/
 
The patchpoint is essentially a summing stage and routing point. Its a subset of a bus without the prochannel and fx processing and automation so its very lightweight. Sidechains in SONAR use a somewhat similar design but with a hidden sidechain bus that handles the summing of inputs prior to the plugin. The internal signal flow of Patchpoints is more complicated however since they have to act as track sources to integrate with recording, track UI etc.
 
post edited by Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk] - 2015/08/28 07:14:46

Noel Borthwick
Senior Manager Audio Core, BandLab
My Blog, Twitter, BandLab Profile
#42
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 14070
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/28 16:44:47 (permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
The patchpoint is essentially a summing stage and routing point. Its a subset of a bus without the prochannel and fx processing and automation so its very lightweight. Sidechains in SONAR use a somewhat similar design but with a hidden sidechain bus that handles the summing of inputs prior to the plugin. The internal signal flow of Patchpoints is more complicated however since they have to act as track sources to integrate with recording, track UI etc.

 
Very illuminating, Noel. I see where you're going with this...
 

The first 3 books in "The Musician's Guide to Home Recording" series are available from Hal Leonard and http://www.reverb.com. Listen to my music on http://www.YouTube.com/thecraiganderton, and visit http://www.craiganderton.com. Thanks!
#43
streckfus
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 339
  • Joined: 2013/11/22 15:29:47
  • Location: Minneapolis, MN
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/28 22:25:16 (permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
 
Thanks for your well thought out response. Indeed patch points would allow you to work exclusively in the track pane if you choose to do so. Tracks are actually a superset of buses in SONAR so there is no reason why you couldn't route one track to another aux track via a patchpoint and do your mixing there if thats what you prefer.
Something like this:
Track 1 ------\
Track 2 ------ Patchpoint 1 ---- Aux Track ---> Master
Track 3 ------/
 
The patchpoint is essentially a summing stage and routing point. Its a subset of a bus without the prochannel and fx processing and automation so its very lightweight. Sidechains in SONAR use a somewhat similar design but with a hidden sidechain bus that handles the summing of inputs prior to the plugin. The internal signal flow of Patchpoints is more complicated however since they have to act as track sources to integrate with recording, track UI etc.



think perhaps I'm catching on now.  So in your above example, Tracks 1, 2 and 3 would be routed to the Aux Track via the upcoming Patchpoint feature, and that Aux track could then be used as a group fader for all three tracks just like a bus, or an EQ could be placed on the Aux Track to process Tracks 1, 2 and 3 as a group?  And I assume that Aux Track could then feed yet another Aux Track via the Patchpoint for parallel processing, etc.?
 
And each Aux Track (just like any other audio track, since that's essentially what the patchpoint is feeding) could be routed to any bus via the track output or through a send?
 
Not that I'd necessarily plan to route a ton of tracks together in series like that; I'd envision mostly using it to group similar tracks together so I could use a single fader or apply effects to the group while still staying within the track pane.
 
(I actually set up a fake session for visual reference but I couldn't post the screenshot, so hopefully what I wrote makes at least some sense!)
 
In any case, this does look like it'll open up a lot of doors.  Really looking forward to seeing this in action.

Sonar Platinum | Win 10 Pro/64-bit | Core i7-6700K | 32GB DDR4 2400 RAM | ASUS Z170-AR | ASUS GeForce GTX 970 | Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 | Yamaha HS8s
#44
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Cakewalk Staff
  • Total Posts : 6475
  • Joined: 2003/11/03 17:22:50
  • Location: Boston, MA, USA
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/28 23:46:32 (permalink)
Yes all of the above. To clarify, the term Aux track is used functionally. There is no special aux track type - you can use any track as an aux. To route that aux to another track you would use a different patchpoint - eg Patchpoint 2.
 
Track 1 ------\
Track 2 ------ Patchpoint 1 ---- Aux Track ---> Patchpoint 2 ---- Aux Track 2 ---> Master
Track 3 ------/
 
And so on..

Noel Borthwick
Senior Manager Audio Core, BandLab
My Blog, Twitter, BandLab Profile
#45
streckfus
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 339
  • Joined: 2013/11/22 15:29:47
  • Location: Minneapolis, MN
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/08/29 00:01:57 (permalink)
Yep, understood that "aux" is really just another audio track, but functions as an aux when using the patchpoint feature.
 
I'm thinking this feature is gonna be a real winner, and will make several others quite giddy. :)
 
Thanks for the feedback and clarification on the track-to-track routing.  Looking forward to it!

Sonar Platinum | Win 10 Pro/64-bit | Core i7-6700K | 32GB DDR4 2400 RAM | ASUS Z170-AR | ASUS GeForce GTX 970 | Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 | Yamaha HS8s
#46
GaryMedia
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 217
  • Joined: 2003/11/05 23:04:20
  • Location: Cary, NC
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 09:11:33 (permalink)
 
I quite agree with Beepster who says "Honestly I don't really like the workflow of having all my busses mixed in with my track strips (that's just me). Too messy and confusing."
 
My reason for desiring track-to-track routing was highlighted when I was using the harmony generation function of iZotope Nectar2.  I put it on a bus and then used a volume envelope on the bus to control when the harmonies would be heard in the Master bus. The harmony bus was driven by a send from a single 'normal' track. 
 
In my workflow I have a central screen that exclusively displays a console view of busses, and below that, another central screen on which I keep the track view. I prefer to have envelopes on tracks and leave my busses static (unvarying). The clumsiness appears when I have to go to the bus view in order to manage the envelope.     

CbB Win10 | Mac Pro 12-core 3.33GHz/48GB | TCL 55" 4K UHD | 480GB SSD | 6TB HDD RAID-5 array| 1.5TB SSD RAID-0 array | Midas M32 | 2x Audient ASP800 |  UAD-2 Duo PCIe | Adam A7X.
http://www.tedlandstudio.com/articles
#47
Snehankur
Max Output Level: -80 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 507
  • Joined: 2014/11/26 00:19:19
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 09:25:46 (permalink)
Present Track - Bus also works fine ... only if the separator between the Tracks and the Bus can be widen as per users choice would be nice and if we can choose a color to make it more prominent would be nicer.
If the Track numbers are more then there is a very thin frame between Tracks and BUS
#48
streckfus
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 339
  • Joined: 2013/11/22 15:29:47
  • Location: Minneapolis, MN
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 10:09:57 (permalink)
What's nice about the upcoming feature is that it allows those who prefer the existing bus/track structure to use it exactly as is, while it also makes it more flexible for those who'd prefer to have some bus-like functionally within the track view.  (And for the record, I personally wouldn't want all of my busses mixed in with tracks, just some that - for me - would be more efficient living right next to the tracks they're processing as opposed to in another pane.

Sonar Platinum | Win 10 Pro/64-bit | Core i7-6700K | 32GB DDR4 2400 RAM | ASUS Z170-AR | ASUS GeForce GTX 970 | Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 | Yamaha HS8s
#49
KPerry
Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3120
  • Joined: 2011/04/26 15:13:15
  • Location: London, UK
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 10:10:12 (permalink)
GaryMedia
 
I quite agree with Beepster who says "Honestly I don't really like the workflow of having all my busses mixed in with my track strips (that's just me). Too messy and confusing."
 



+1 to this.
 
I also think there is a definite advantage in thinking about busses and folders differently: folders are for organisational purposes and should be focused on and optimised for that; busses are for mixing and should be focused on and optimised for that.  Mixing their functions affects their usability and clarity.
#50
PilotGav
Max Output Level: -82 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 436
  • Joined: 2004/12/10 22:00:46
  • Location: Toronto
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 11:04:13 (permalink)
KPerry
GaryMedia
 
I quite agree with Beepster who says "Honestly I don't really like the workflow of having all my busses mixed in with my track strips (that's just me). Too messy and confusing."
 



+1 to this.
 
I also think there is a definite advantage in thinking about busses and folders differently: folders are for organisational purposes and should be focused on and optimised for that; busses are for mixing and should be focused on and optimised for that.  Mixing their functions affects their usability and clarity.



Valid points, however this should be a choice. Not something mandated by the lack of a feature.
#51
KPerry
Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3120
  • Joined: 2011/04/26 15:13:15
  • Location: London, UK
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 11:26:46 (permalink)
I'll argue with that (politely!): trying to cater for every desire can - note I say can! - lead to a bad implementation or too much complexity or bad UI.  Sometimes one and only way of doing something is a good thing.
#52
xbitz
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 30
  • Joined: 2015/07/24 23:55:28
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 11:26:52 (permalink)
will we able to put clips with different fx chains into the aux tracks (with clip based automation curves) or it remains a dream ?  (so do we able to change the audio routing on the aux tracks, from clips(fx) > fx rack > track out to fx rack > clip(fx) > track out ) different fxs on different now time positions would be nice 

hope it makes sense ...
#53
streckfus
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 339
  • Joined: 2013/11/22 15:29:47
  • Location: Minneapolis, MN
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 12:04:01 (permalink)
KPerry
I'll argue with that (politely!): trying to cater for every desire can - note I say can! - lead to a bad implementation or too much complexity or bad UI.  Sometimes one and only way of doing something is a good thing.



I'll counter that (politely!): I do agree that it's a slippery slope when trying to cater to everyone's desires, and if CW was planning on changing the track/bus UI entirely I agree that it could introduce some unexpected behavior or complicate the workflow everyone is used to.  However, as I understand it, this new patchpoint feature is more of an "under the hood" type feature that doesn't affect any of the existing functionality on the surface, it just allows for more routing flexibility for those who choose to use the feature.  Those who have no use for track-to-track routing, recording synths, printing a bus to a new track etc. won't need to do anything differently because the track/bus setup will remain as is.  If there is added complexity, it'll only be for the users who wish to use this feature, and I for one would be okay with wrapping my head around a new UI for signal routing or dealing with some usability bugs/issues because in the end it would be worth it.
 
I just think it's awesome that Cakewalk is working on a flexible feature like this, but appears to be doing it in such a way that it will have zero impact on the existing workflows for those who have no desire to use it.
post edited by streckfus - 2015/09/01 12:12:19

Sonar Platinum | Win 10 Pro/64-bit | Core i7-6700K | 32GB DDR4 2400 RAM | ASUS Z170-AR | ASUS GeForce GTX 970 | Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 | Yamaha HS8s
#54
Zargg
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 10666
  • Joined: 2014/09/28 04:20:14
  • Location: Norway
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 12:13:04 (permalink)
Very well written, streckfus. I agree, and hope it is "under the hood / bonnet" fixes that allows this.
All the best.

Ken Nilsen
Zargg
BBZ
Win 10 Pro X64, Cakewalk by Bandlab, SPlat X64, AMD AM3+ fx-8320, 16Gb RAM, RME Ucx (+ ARC), Tascam FW 1884, M-Audio Keystation 61es, *AKAI MPK Pro 25, *Softube Console1, Alesis DM6 USB, Maschine MkII
Laptop setup: Win 10 X64, i5 2.4ghz, 8gb RAM, 320gb 7200 RPM HD, Focusrite Solo, + *
 
#55
KPerry
Max Output Level: -44 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3120
  • Joined: 2011/04/26 15:13:15
  • Location: London, UK
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 12:21:10 (permalink)
I think we're in agreement on that piece: the current track-to-track/synth recording features don't look like they're going to mess with the UI piece and look independent of bus/track merging!
#56
Dave Modisette
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 11050
  • Joined: 2003/11/13 22:12:55
  • Location: Brandon, Florida
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/01 16:07:22 (permalink)
Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
No GUI required today - patch points are created from the track input/outputs and show up in the menus.
Although in the future we could do some fancy routing matrix view.


I would hope that you wouldn't use manpower for a "cute" GUI.  I love the idea of patchpoints though.

Dave Modisette ... rocks a Purrrfect Audio Studio Pro rig.

http://www.gatortraks.com 
My music.
... And of course, the Facebook page. 
#57
streckfus
Max Output Level: -84 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 339
  • Joined: 2013/11/22 15:29:47
  • Location: Minneapolis, MN
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/02 11:20:49 (permalink)
Dave Modisette
 
I would hope that you wouldn't use manpower for a "cute" GUI.  I love the idea of patchpoints though.




You'd originally submitted a feature request for CW to rethink the current track/bus setup, correct?  Kinda neat to see this patchpoint feature in works, eh? :)

Sonar Platinum | Win 10 Pro/64-bit | Core i7-6700K | 32GB DDR4 2400 RAM | ASUS Z170-AR | ASUS GeForce GTX 970 | Focusrite Saffire Pro 40 | Yamaha HS8s
#58
Makzimia
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 258
  • Joined: 2012/09/21 22:32:41
  • Location: England
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/02 11:39:22 (permalink)
Very impressive. Nice work going on yet again. 

Tony Carpenter
Castille Productions
Sonar Platinum//Cubase 10 Pro//Logic Pro X 
Mac Pro Dual Xeon 6 core 3.46ghz
32GB RAM
UA Apollo Quad FireWire, UAD2 Quad, X-touch, NI 12 Ultimate Collectors, Montage 7

#59
Kylotan
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 995
  • Joined: 2007/09/10 17:27:35
  • Location: Nottingham, UK
  • Status: offline
Re: Me patiently waiting for Aux Tracks in Sonar 2015/09/02 15:07:41 (permalink)
KPerry
I also think there is a definite advantage in thinking about busses and folders differently: folders are for organisational purposes and should be focused on and optimised for that; busses are for mixing and should be focused on and optimised for that.  Mixing their functions affects their usability and clarity.



And yet at the moment, buses themselves are used for 2 different purposes - (a) for grouping submixes, and (b) for send/returns. And they're mixed in together. For me, it's annoying that if I just want to treat 2 tracks as 1, that has to happen down in the bus pane instead of where the actual audio or MIDI events are in the track pane.

Sonar Platinum (Newburyport) / Win 8.1 64bit / Focusrite Scarlett 6i6 / Absynth / Kontakt / Play / Superior Drummer 2 / ESP LTD guitar / etc
 
Twilight's Embrace - gothic/death metal | Other works - instrumental/soundtracks
#60
Page: < 123 > Showing page 2 of 3
Jump to:
© 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1