Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Note that this is a "loose exe" so you will need to copy the proper flavor (x64/86 or Platinum/Pro/Artist) to your SONAR programs folder. If you test it let me know if it works.

Noel,
 
This is better but there are other glitches with this version, the tracks with Effectrix and LfoTool have actual audio glitches, something is probably wrong with fast bounce and effectrix. Lfotool sounds fine this time.
 
Update: actually something messed up Effectrix settings in between, I updated to build 30 in the control center, and now the rendering is all fine. there are actual digital artifacts in the rendering, and effectrix looses a setting all the time with this version. Rolling back to everett update 1
 
 
Erik.

Hi Erik, its pretty unlikely that there is any difference with this build compared to everett. Its now doing exactly what everett did when fast bouncing. If there are problems they are preexisting and possibly with the plugins. i.e. if it works with one tempo based plugin it should work with all others.

Noel Borthwick [Cakewalk]
Hi Erik, its pretty unlikely that there is any difference with this build compared to everett. Its now doing exactly what everett did when fast bouncing. If there are problems they are preexisting and possibly with the plugins.

Yes looks indeed like the plugins are acting this time, the digital noise is on the everett bounce as well... need to investigate...

My gosh....I'm away from Sonar for a couple of days editing a wedding video (in Vegas)...and come to the forums to find that Noel has already worked on a fix for the fast bounce problem.
 
NOW THAT'S CUSTOMER SERVICE...!!!!!!!!!!!!1

I too have had problems with Fast Bounce since Foxboro updadte.  Some tracks get shifted in time and one soft synth played cut-off notes.  Come to think of it, it has a couple tempo changes.  No oversampling in my project.  Audible Bounce works fine.

PS  I posted without reading the whole thread and some of the griping.  I, for one, am so happy to be using SONAR Platinum and updating it when the fresh code comes out.  If there is a temporary problem, I know it will be fixed and in the meantime I always have X3 installed to back me up, or I can use a wrkaround or do a roll-back. 
 
And now Noel has a fix.  What other DAW company is this responsive to users?  My loyalty to Cakewalk since version 3.1 has always been rewarded.
 
I remember when we used to be happy to "multitrack" by bouncing mono tracks on Sony "sound-on-sound" stereo tape recorders and then moved up to Tascam portastudios.
 
It's a lot like life.  Enjoy what you got. 

+1 I still have my Tascam 424 under this desk in its original box. It is a good reminder to appreciate what is versus what was.

Jimbo 88

OldTimerNewComer
 
just pointing a straight line to an alternate solution because the OP seemed bound and determined to
not accept any of the ones available within Sonar.
 

This is so inane it's insulting.  I really doubt you are capable of determining of what i am "bound and determined to do."  So you would do yourself well by refraining from such things.
 
I guess really the best course is just ignore people like this.  I'm really wondering why I'm wasting my time.

1st of all, that's just harsh. There was nothing inane at all about my post.
2nd...Note the 1st statement of my post.
"Hi Craig. When I mentioned that other program in recent posts I was, I'm sure you know,
just pointing a straight line to an alternate solution because the OP seemed bound and determined to not accept any of the ones available within Sonar."
 
YOU sir, are not the OP I was speaking of... it was yorolpal.
He was seeking a way to route the input of a track to more than one bus
and I was attempting to help with that end. Craig(whom I was addressing
in the post you described as "inane") was also on that thread;
I would not EXPECT you to understand, the comment wasn't addressed to you.
 
Ignoring me would be a most acceptable outcome for me.
Perhaps you should just stay out of my kool-aid.
 
3rd, I insulted NO ONE. YOROLPAL thanked  me for my input.
 
Fourth, and finally, I agree: You are definitely  wasting your time.
 
Respectfully,
Mel

Jimbo 88

OldTimerNewComer
 
just pointing a straight line to an alternate solution because the OP seemed bound and determined to
not accept any of the ones available within Sonar.
 

This is so inane it's insulting.  I really doubt you are capable of determining of what i am "bound and determined to do."  So you would do yourself well by refraining from such things.
 
I guess really the best course is just ignore people like this.  I'm really wondering why I'm wasting my time.

1st of all, that's just harsh. There was nothing inane at all about my post.
2nd...Note the 1st statement of my post.
"Hi Craig. When I mentioned that other program in recent posts I was, I'm sure you know,
just pointing a straight line to an alternate solution because the OP seemed bound and determined to not accept any of the ones available within Sonar."
 
YOU sir, are not the OP I was speaking of... it was yorolpal.
He was seeking a way to route the input of a track to more than one bus
and I was attempting to help with that end. Craig(whom I was addressing)
in the post you described as "inane" was also on that thread;
I would not EXPECT you to understand, the comment wasn't addressed to you.
Ignoring me would be a most acceptable outcome for me.
Perhaps you should just stay out of my kool-aid.
 
3rd, I insulted NO ONE. YOROLPAL thanked  me for my input.
Fourth, and finally, I agree: You are definitely  wasting your time.
 
Respectfully,
Mel

I apologize for the double post...
Guess I was punching the keys a little hard...
 
Mel