pinguinotuerto
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 976
- Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 15:51:23
(permalink)
I prefer Sonar's approach to layers, now if I could only select the layer of my choice to display I'd be in heaven! P.S. If anyone at Cakewalk is reading . Since I'm working with linked clips across multiple tracks, if you implement this feaure, please make sure the selection of which clip to display is followed across all tracks with the linked clips. Just like it works now with editing, if you edit a linked clip, the edit takes place across all tracks. otherwise, it would still be a pain to work with. ( I know, wishful thinking). 
HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum 2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit) AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)KRK VXT 8 Monitors
Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
|
...wicked
Max Output Level: -1.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 7360
- Joined: 2003/12/18 01:00:56
- Location: Seattle
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 16:09:24
(permalink)
UnderTow
An option in Sonar to only allow the top (or bottom) layer to play back at any time
To be clear you're talking about top-most (or bottom-most) layer to contain data plays back, right? Otherwise you could just solo the top-most (or bottom-most) layer. Granted you'd have to move and/or copy to build comps that way...but you could kind of make it happen. The Cubase screenshot makes a very interesting case I've never seen before. I've found I often get carried away with layers, leaving in surprise double parts and whatnot. One feature that would help make layer workflow better is a "explode to tracks" option. Granted, it's not actually a layer-specific feature/workflow, but it would ease busting out un-wanted data that would otherwise get hidden and/or archived.
=========== The Fog People =========== Intel i7-4790 16GB RAM ASUS Z97 Roland OctaCapture Win10/64 SONAR Platinum 64-bit billions VSTs, some of which work
|
Keni
Max Output Level: -17.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5769
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:42:15
- Location: Willits, CA USA
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/23 19:21:24
(permalink)
revsnd
The root of this is not whether or not anyone records live drums at all. The problem is that there is no rhyme nor reason to how sonar handles track layers at all. Even doing V Vocal bounces after editing, you would think that sonar would hide the muted original clip behind the newly bounced clip. After pitch correcting a full track, it looks like a mess of muted and un-muted clips, with no apparent reason for some muted track being in the forefront , and some being hid in the track layers. ARGHHH! Another great idea from calkwalk that had me sold during the sales pitch, that on the surface is brilliant, but once you dig in even a bit, the flaws are very apparent.
It's the difference in the funtion's intent... This has been a pet issue with me for a while (even back in old faithful)... what you really want is Freeze to properly handle tracks that use VV... It works fine as far as freezing, but unfreezing is a mess... So I've been told over and over that "I'm not supposed to freeze it and I should do some version of bounce as the 'proper' way to do it"... I didn't buy that then and I don't now... Freeze should do it but it's been buggy in this manner since it's inception... It has not been fixed as far as I know but I will try it at some point in X1b to see for myself... This was one of many things I had hoped they'd spent time on for the new release.... Instead they spent their' time re-inventing the wheel and forgetting to put tires on the car! Keni
|
Keni
Max Output Level: -17.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5769
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:42:15
- Location: Willits, CA USA
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 19:38:04
(permalink)
pinguinotuerto
Keni
Sorry to intrude, but PT's layers were far more difficult to work with than Sonar's when this tool appeared. Maybe only for my work, but I sure didn't like using PT then even more than now!
Ken, you're not intrudung at all! I never said Pro Tools layers were better (or worse), one thing's for sure, since the beginning with PT you could select which layer you wanted to work on/display. Haven't used it in ages so I don't know how they work presently. Besides, I don't care about Pro Tools, I love Sonar and I wish it would do what I need it to do. Like revsnd said, this doesn't apply to just multi-track drums. The clutter can be overwhelming even in a single track.
Funny how we all work so differently... ;-) For me, I found the lack of ability to have them all available at once (layers on a track) made it essentially useless for me and I might as well use another track. I would like to have more control over which is apparent (on top) when I turn display layers off... and I would all the clip-based functions to be working correctly in layers (I haven't seen if that was fixed for X1b yet)... But other than that, I like the way Sonar deals with layers... Oh, there are issues with things such as using VV in layers... but that's yet another issue I believe... Keni
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 19:58:02
(permalink)
...wicked
UnderTow
An option in Sonar to only allow the top (or bottom) layer to play back at any time
To be clear you're talking about top-most (or bottom-most) layer to contain data plays back, right?
Yes exactly. And as soon as you remove the data that was the top layer, Cubase automatically un-mutes the next layer down (in the same time region). Or if you slide the clip left or right, the muted region on the next layer (if there is one) also slides left or right. Otherwise you could just solo the top-most (or bottom-most) layer. Granted you'd have to move and/or copy to build comps that way...but you could kind of make it happen.
Yes but it doesn't work the same way. The auto-muting makes it very elegant and quick. The Cubase screenshot makes a very interesting case I've never seen before.
I thought it would be a good idea to include it. The text description doesn't do it favours. Even the picture doesn't really convey how quick and easy this is. But I ALSO like the Sonar functionality so I would like that auto-muting/single-playback-layer behaviour as an option and not a replacement of the current Sonar way of doing things. I've found I often get carried away with layers, leaving in surprise double parts and whatnot. One feature that would help make layer workflow better is a "explode to tracks" option. Granted, it's not actually a layer-specific feature/workflow, but it would ease busting out un-wanted data that would otherwise get hidden and/or archived.
I think a few layer specific features might be more useful. For the situation you mention above a more effective "rebuild layers" should do the trick. A "Flatten layers" function which effective bounces all active regions to clips could be useful with "Flatten Visible Layers" doing the same but automatically muting any non-visible layers first. Etc. UnderTow
|
FastBikerBoy
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 11326
- Joined: 2008/01/25 16:15:36
- Location: Watton, Norfolk, UK
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 20:49:25
(permalink)
Just to check my sanity and the insanity of track layers, I recorded three takes of a guitar track tonight into one track three layers so there was Take 1, Take 2, & Take 3. Selected rebuild layers and it ordered them Take 3, Take 1, then Take 2. Is there any logic to that at all? 
|
pinguinotuerto
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 976
- Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 22:29:47
(permalink)
FastBikerBoy
Just to check my sanity and the insanity of track layers, I recorded three takes of a guitar track tonight into one track three layers so there was Take 1, Take 2, & Take 3.
Selected rebuild layers and it ordered them Take 3, Take 1, then Take 2. Is there any logic to that at all?
Yes, it's called "Cakewalk Logic". Just kidding, I love Cakewalk.
HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum 2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit) AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)KRK VXT 8 Monitors
Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
|
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6518
- Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 22:46:56
(permalink)
FastBikerBoy
Just to check my sanity and the insanity of track layers, I recorded three takes of a guitar track tonight into one track three layers so there was Take 1, Take 2, & Take 3.
Selected rebuild layers and it ordered them Take 3, Take 1, then Take 2. Is there any logic to that at all?
Layers are definitely unpredictable in their behavior, as admitted by the Cake reps on this thread. In this particular example, with the takes not showing up in a logical order, it doesn't actually matter. We're using our ears to hear what each take sounds like, so what the order of the takes were recorded in isn't part of the decision making process. You know what I mean. The "rebuild layers" command, in my experience, is to be avoided. It's the other command which is much more useful - whatever it's called, the one that gets rid of empty layers. I use Shift drag vertically to consolidate takes, trimming the ends of of takes so they don't overlap. Maybe I did 12 takes, but I end up with 3 or 4 layers of Good Stuff to choose from. That leaves a bunch of empty layers which take up valuable screen space - but as I only recently discovered, you use the command to get rid of empty layers - now you're organized and have space to see what you're working with as you edit those layers and put together your comp. RB
Sonar X3e Studio Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller Alesis i|O2 interface Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz 8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64 with dual monitors
|
pinguinotuerto
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 976
- Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 22:50:13
(permalink)
rbowser
Layers are definitely unpredictable in their behavior, as admitted by the Cake reps on this thread. In this particular example, with the takes not showing up in a logical order, it doesn't actually matter.
RB
RB, I dissagree. It matters if you have linked clips in other tracks. If you have 8 tracks of drums, you want the layers to be in the same order across all tracks.
HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum 2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit) AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)KRK VXT 8 Monitors
Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
|
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6518
- Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 22:54:28
(permalink)
pinguinotuerto
rbowser
Layers are definitely unpredictable in their behavior, as admitted by the Cake reps on this thread. In this particular example, with the takes not showing up in a logical order, it doesn't actually matter.
RB
RB, I dissagree. It matters if you have linked clips in other tracks. If you have 8 tracks of drums, you want the layers to be in the same order across all tracks.
Hi, Ping - No need to disagree. I wasn't talking about linked clips. Note - in my experience it's a bad idea to link clips. Even when a passage is a repeat of what happened previously, I never have them exactly the same. I prefer, and feel it's better, to work with repeats as new material rather than exact duplicates of what happened before. - But in any case, I wasn't talking about linked files. If you're doing multiple takes under normal circumstances, it matters exactly Zero in what order they show up. RB
Sonar X3e Studio Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller Alesis i|O2 interface Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz 8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64 with dual monitors
|
pinguinotuerto
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 976
- Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 22:57:29
(permalink)
rbowser
... Note - in my experience it's a bad idea to link clips.
RB
Are you serious? There's no better way to edit drums across tracks. Any edit you make to any clip translates to the rest of your clips. It would take 10 times as long without linked clips.
HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum 2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit) AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)KRK VXT 8 Monitors
Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
|
Keni
Max Output Level: -17.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 5769
- Joined: 2003/11/04 10:42:15
- Location: Willits, CA USA
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/23 23:12:00
(permalink)
FastBikerBoy
Just to check my sanity and the insanity of track layers, I recorded three takes of a guitar track tonight into one track three layers so there was Take 1, Take 2, & Take 3.
Selected rebuild layers and it ordered them Take 3, Take 1, then Take 2. Is there any logic to that at all?
I've never figured that one out either... What is it using for priorities to decide that... All three are equal in length and obvious would be increasing/decreasing numbers if they were anything more substantial than clip names.... (what if the name no longer had a number)... I stopped using it and manually do all my re-arranging... PITA.... But I wouldn't trade Sonar's system for Cubase's... I haven't used the auto-thing that wicked mentions, but I would likely hate having things automatically turn on/off... Keni
|
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6518
- Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 00:32:08
(permalink)
pinguinotuerto
rbowser
... Note - in my experience it's a bad idea to link clips.
RB
Are you serious? There's no better way to edit drums across tracks. Any edit you make to any clip translates to the rest of your clips. It would take 10 times as long without linked clips.
Hello again, Pingu - Yeah, I was serious. I do need to defer to your experience with recording live drums, because I've never done that. I was talking in general about the concept of linked clips or tracks - I really don't understand the need. If you don't want to edit the same material again (which with pitched instrument tracks is more desirable), then it's a 5 second routine to copy the work you've done with one audio file and then paste it in the place where it repeats. You don't need the linking - Really, it's only 5 seconds more work to paste in the same work. Edit your drum instrument's contribution to the chorus - copy it, paste it in at the next chorus - you're done. RB
Sonar X3e Studio Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller Alesis i|O2 interface Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz 8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64 with dual monitors
|
pinguinotuerto
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 976
- Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 00:58:33
(permalink)
rbowser
pinguinotuerto
rbowser
... Note - in my experience it's a bad idea to link clips.
RB
Are you serious? There's no better way to edit drums across tracks. Any edit you make to any clip translates to the rest of your clips. It would take 10 times as long without linked clips.
Hello again, Pingu - Yeah, I was serious. I do need to defer to your experience with recording live drums, because I've never done that. I was talking in general about the concept of linked clips or tracks - I really don't understand the need. If you don't want to edit the same material again (which with pitched instrument tracks is more desirable), then it's a 5 second routine to copy the work you've done with one audio file and then paste it in the place where it repeats. You don't need the linking - Really, it's only 5 seconds more work to paste in the same work. Edit your drum instrument's contribution to the chorus - copy it, paste it in at the next chorus - you're done.
RB
I think we're talking apples and oranges. You keep saying "the same material" so I'm guessing you're talking about copying and pasting clips containing the same data or perhaps, looping groove clips? I'm talking about entire clips that run the entire lenght of the song containing different data (in this case 8 tracks of drums) which were recorded simultaneously. It is imperative to have those clips linked, especially if you have to trim them, split them or whatever it is you need to do. Have you ever recorded more than one track at a time? Doesn't have to be drums. It can be an acoustic guitar that's miked in stereo or perhaps an electric with two mics (one on each speaker of the amp). You'd want those clips to be linked. I'm just perplexed as to why you wouldn't want to link the clips. Perhaps I'm missing something?
HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum 2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit) AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)KRK VXT 8 Monitors
Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
|
tunekicker
Max Output Level: -65 dBFS
- Total Posts : 1261
- Joined: 2005/10/28 14:39:50
- Location: Grand Junction, CO
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 03:00:01
(permalink)
|
FastBikerBoy
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 11326
- Joined: 2008/01/25 16:15:36
- Location: Watton, Norfolk, UK
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 03:55:18
(permalink)
I very rarely record live drums but I do record acoustic guitars with a stereo pair. Or sometimes I use a close mike and an ambient mike on a guitar cab. So it tends to be only a couple of tracks at a time for me rather than a full drum kit.
Both of those occasions are when I use clip groups in multi-layered but separate tracks. When I'm comping those perhaps from a half-a-dozen or more takes I can't imagine not using the clip groups feature.
I do tend to have only of those tracks open to full layered view at a time though but you are quite right Randy in that the "Rebuild layers" is best avoided altogether. I'm more intrigued by what criteria the command uses than actually using it.
It would make sense to me if the criteria was user selectable, perhaps from the following.
time/date recorded
alphabetical
Quantity of Audible material
At least that way there would be some sort of use for the command. At the moment is is almost redundant because as pointed out you can simply use the remove empty layers to clean up a layered track.
|
Somerset
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 634
- Joined: 2004/10/20 06:07:27
- Location: Sydney, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 04:15:38
(permalink)
It is very important that layers do not get randomly jumbled up. If you have done for example 3 takes of a guitar part, and you know that the last take was the best one, yet it ends up in the middle layer, it is all too easy to end up using the wrong take. It's true that you have to use your ears, but you also rely on visual information a lot when comping, especially when there are many layers, and many tracks. Maybe we could have a right click option to allow the layer of a clip to be changed. I agree it would help to be able to hide unused layers. This could be another layer button in addition to the existing solo and mute layer buttons.
|
Jon Con
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
- Total Posts : 275
- Joined: 2006/04/17 06:37:07
- Location: South Wales
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 07:58:54
(permalink)
☄ Helpful
I think pingu is on about clip grouping, linking clips I think is more about copying and pasting the same part at another point in the song and copying the properties from that position to the other. Clip grouping links all clips in a section together so if you move one, all the other grouped tracks will move as well. rebuilding layers with the clips grouped will put the takes in the same order across all the tracks so at least there's some form of continuity. It speeds up workflow a lot for drums and I do use it for multi-mic'd instruments as well. I can maximise the screen for one track (usually the kick on drums) and know all the edits have been carried out to the others. what I've done in the past for multiple clips in layers is to use the clips name property as a note (good take, ending a bit off, USE THIS ONE). If anything get rebuilt, it's not too hard to still differentiate each take and relatively straightforward to do, in the inspector pane, go to the clip menu at the top, select the clip you want and just change the name from "RECORD 01" to "insert relevent info here" done
post edited by Jon Con - 2011/03/24 07:59:55
|
UnderTow
Max Output Level: -37 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3848
- Joined: 2004/01/06 12:13:49
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 08:11:37
(permalink)
rbowser
Layers are definitely unpredictable in their behavior, as admitted by the Cake reps on this thread. In this particular example, with the takes not showing up in a logical order, it doesn't actually matter. We're using our ears to hear what each take sounds like, so what the order of the takes were recorded in isn't part of the decision making process. You know what I mean.
You already heard the takes while they were being recorded! Takes should be ordered in the the order they were recorded so that you can directly select the right take(s). Occasionally you might want to re-listen to some of the takes if there is more than one potential candidate for keeping but even if you just remember one take as a write-off, you can straight away remove it from the selection process. Having to re-listen to every take to determine which is which is wasting time and slowing down the creative process. And of course there is the grouping of clips that pinguinotuerto mentions. (I am quite sure you mean grouping and not linking). UnderTow
|
ShermanSmelville
Max Output Level: -89 dBFS
- Total Posts : 80
- Joined: 2010/12/22 14:44:53
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 08:14:15
(permalink)
☄ Helpful
Yeah, I think he means he grouping and I think he is right. It could and should be done better in Sonar. Other DAWs are far ahead in Audio tracking/mixing.
|
FastBikerBoy
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 11326
- Joined: 2008/01/25 16:15:36
- Location: Watton, Norfolk, UK
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 08:28:17
(permalink)
I'm reasonably happy with the clip grouping and editing facilities although it would be nice if envelopes were included in the group. It's the actual layer set up that needs some TLC. IMHO.
|
chuckebaby
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 13146
- Joined: 2011/01/04 14:55:28
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 08:32:55
(permalink)
i thought this thread was changed??its starnge..theres two indentical subjects with diffferent titles
Windows 8.1 X64 Sonar Platinum x64 Custom built: Asrock z97 1150 - Intel I7 4790k - 16GB corsair DDR3 1600 - PNY SSD 220GBFocusrite Saffire 18I8 - Mackie Control
|
FastBikerBoy
Forum Host
- Total Posts : 11326
- Joined: 2008/01/25 16:15:36
- Location: Watton, Norfolk, UK
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 08:39:24
(permalink)
It's called a stereo thread. 
|
Kurtly
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 33
- Joined: 2011/01/27 18:51:42
- Location: Canberra, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 10:27:19
(permalink)
I also record live drums and feel the OP's pain! Another of my gripes with it is the little tiny m/s buttons on every layer. A project I'm currently working on I recorded 12 track for drums.. The drummer wanted to try alternate fills and beats in a few places, plus a few punch ins to correct errors. When he asked me to "play the other take?" I would have to stop, lean in ans squint, click the tiny m/s button on 12 channels.. With all the tracks linked couldn't, for example, the top track control all the others.. If I solo take 3 in track 1, it solos take 3 in the next 11 tracks. Maybe it can do it and I've never found it 
|
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6518
- Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 10:40:15
(permalink)
Jon Con
I think pingu is on about clip grouping, linking clips I think is more about copying and pasting the same part at another point in the song and copying the properties from that position to the other...
Yes, that's exactly right - Linking and Grouping are two different but similar things, and that's why you and I were confused over each other's posts, Pingu. Now I understand you totally - and as I said, I defer to you and anyone who's recording a set of live drums. I've never done that, and working with Layers is fairly new to me also. There's no doubt, as established in this thread and others, that the iffy layer implementation in Sonar is making life difficult for many folks. Though it's less convenient in several ways, I still feel more comfortable doing multiple takes on separate tracks - The process is so straight forward, with results that don't get jumbled etc. But that's probably an unacceptable alternative to people doing a lot of live tracking. Randy B.
Sonar X3e Studio Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller Alesis i|O2 interface Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz 8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64 with dual monitors
|
Kurtly
Max Output Level: -90 dBFS
- Total Posts : 33
- Joined: 2011/01/27 18:51:42
- Location: Canberra, Australia
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 10:49:14
(permalink)
rbowser
Jon Con
I think pingu is on about clip grouping, linking clips I think is more about copying and pasting the same part at another point in the song and copying the properties from that position to the other...
Yes, that's exactly right - Linking and Grouping are two different but similar things, and that's why you and I were confused over each other's posts, Pingu. Now I understand you totally - and as I said, I defer to you and anyone who's recording a set of live drums. I've never done that, and working with Layers is fairly new to me also. There's no doubt, as established in this thread and others, that the iffy layer implementation in Sonar is making life difficult for many folks.
Though it's less convenient in several ways, I still feel more comfortable doing multiple takes on separate tracks - The process is so straight forward, with results that don't get jumbled etc. But that's probably an unacceptable alternative to people doing a lot of live tracking.
Randy B.
Working that way makes accurate editing much harder.. there are editing tools that only work on layers.
|
rbowser
Max Output Level: -10 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6518
- Joined: 2005/07/31 14:32:34
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 10:56:40
(permalink)
Kurtly
...there are editing tools that only work on layers...
Hi, Kurtly - I know that using separate tracks isn't as convenient, and so isn't a viable alternative for a lot of people, but I can't think of editing tools that only work on layers--? What are they? RB
Sonar X3e Studio Roland A-800 MIDI keyboard controller Alesis i|O2 interface Gigabyte Technology-AMD Phenom II @ 3 GHz 8 Gb RAM 6 Core Windows 7 Home Premium x64 with dual monitors
|
pinguinotuerto
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 976
- Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 11:08:26
(permalink)
Hi Guys!! Thanks for all the info. Yeah, I was getting Linked and Grouped clips mixed up, sorry RB. That's why we couldn't understand each other. My bad . Yes I mean, grouped clips!
HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum 2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit) AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)KRK VXT 8 Monitors
Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
|
pinguinotuerto
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 976
- Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
- Status: offline
Re:I think the Cakewalk developers live in a bubble!
2011/03/24 11:10:21
(permalink)
chuckebaby
i thought this thread was changed??its starnge..theres two indentical subjects with diffferent titles
Hey Chucke!! I had to change the thread's title so that Zyler would unlock it. My original thread title was considered "inflamatory". 
HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum 2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit) AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)KRK VXT 8 Monitors
Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
|
pinguinotuerto
Max Output Level: -71 dBFS
- Total Posts : 976
- Joined: 2009/12/01 18:46:41
- Status: offline
Re:LAYERS: When will Cakewalk devote time to Implementing Layers properly?
2011/03/24 11:19:18
(permalink)
Jon Con
what I've done in the past for multiple clips in layers is to use the clips name property as a note (good take, ending a bit off, USE THIS ONE). If anything get rebuilt, it's not too hard to still differentiate each take and relatively straightforward to do, in the inspector pane, go to the clip menu at the top, select the clip you want and just change the name from "RECORD 01" to "insert relevent info here" done
Great, great idea!!!!!!!!
HP DV7-3085 Laptop (Intel Core i7 720 1.6 GHZ, 6 GB RAM, 1333 MHZ FSB, 2 500GB 7200 RPM Internal HDs, 17" screen), HP 2009m Monitor, 2TB Ext Drive
Line 6 UX8 with PodFarm 2 Platinum 2 Joe Meek VC6Q British Channels
Sonar Platinum & X3e Producer (64 Bit) AD2 w Roland V-Drums (TD4KX2)
Windows 7 Home Premium (64 bit)KRK VXT 8 Monitors
Frontier Alphatrack, Razer Naga Mouse, nanoKontrol2
|