ampfixer

Anderton

ampfixer
Is there a walk through for creating these FX chains so we can see how it's done?

That's a really good idea!!! Just don't tell Andrew, he'll expect me to do a video about it tonight.
 
Is there any particular one for which you'd like to see a walkthrough? I mean, if you're giving free consulting, I'm going to take advantage of it...

Sorry, I don't get this bit. I'm happy to see the process applied to any non PC plug-in, particularly the bit about controlling multiple parameters with one control. Could I create a control that would allow me to put a Waves CLA2 in the PC and have a single knob that would increase input gain and peak reduction at the same time?
 
I assumed those of the sorts of controls you use on your FX chains.

There is already a knob on CLA2 that does that, the "peak reduction" one. The gain knob is for makeup/output gain.

It would sure be nice to have the PC modules expose their controls to control surfaces though. Is there an active FR for this?

subtlearts
It would sure be nice to have the PC modules expose their controls to control surfaces though. Is there an active FR for this?

FWIW controls for some PC modules are exposed to MIDI learn: QuadCurve EQ, Tube, S-Type Bus Compressor, and PC-76 U-Type Compressor. The others can be automated, but aren't exposed to controllers...but I would think if some modules could expose their controls, others could too.

Anderton

subtlearts
It would sure be nice to have the PC modules expose their controls to control surfaces though. Is there an active FR for this?

FWIW controls for some PC modules are exposed to MIDI learn: QuadCurve EQ, Tube, S-Type Bus Compressor, and PC-76 U-Type Compressor. The others can be automated, but aren't exposed to controllers...but I would think if some modules could expose their controls, others could too.

Okay... this kind of explains a MASSIVE frustration I had a while back when I was going through my first round of learning (during the X2 release). I chalked it up to me being too stupid to breathe (in a digital production sense) but if there are certain controls that refuse to map to MIDI controllers then, well I gotta say that is kind of screwed up and confusing as fartballs.
 
Essentially back then I was trying my best to set up my controller (just a small keyboard controller and a pad controller but both of which have assignable knobs/faders/etc) to adjust things... all following the directions in the manual. It was all very hit or miss and I got frustrated and because of that have only recently started going back down that rabbit hole (where I am discovering other quirks and limitations).
 
I kind of figured that ANYTHING that can be tweaked should be able to be mapped/MIDI learned. Especially something so crucial and "designed for convenience" like the ProChannel strip. This does indeed explain why some things would provide MIDI learn (and work) while other things wouldn't.
 
I guess as a novice that is kind of disheartening and frustrating. As someone who is now getting into these more advanced type of external control functions I gotta say... why the heck is this NOT the standard?
 
Perhaps MIDI control stuff is one of the things the Bakers should start fixing up/improving now that the program is fully matured. I was poking around at some of the mapping on the "cheap" DAW and was blown away at how easy and through it was. I attempted some of the same stuff in Sonar but all that seemed to be available was basic transport and it was really quite strange and convoluted. Now knowing that MIDI learn is a "maybe/maybe not" type situation... well that could certainly all be fixed and perhaps make the platform even more desirable.
 
Not freaking out (mostly) but that does seem like a serious limitation in this day and age. I've heard tell of Cake more focusing on "touch" as opposed to MIDI control but really that helps me not one whit... nor does it help the folks who spent enormous piles of cash on those fancy, Sonar specific control surfaces.
 
Okay, that is a little ranty and freaky but seriously... not p*ssed and it is one thing I accept about Sonar however it really REALLY would be something nice to get worked on. It would be good for the product and coax some of the live on the fly tweakers to consider Sonar as viable.
 
Seriously not yelling or angry. Just befuddled really.
 
Peace.

I can relate. It's likely an example of fallout from the transition to the X series, which in a sense despite the name change and membership model change is still with us. Ideally, yes, anything that is editable onscreen should be both automatable, and exposed for MIDI control. In practice, the complexity of the Sonar codebase and the various layers its interface contains - FX bins, FX chains, Pro Channel modules, FX chains hosted by Pro Channel modules, Clip FX bins... - make it understandably complicated to make sense of what's being exposed where and to whom by which. And if so, why not.
 
I haven't had time to pore through the FR forum yet but I will do so if nobody else gets there first, and we can make it a formal FR to please get all of those controls exposed somehow. I don't know exactly how it would work - if you've got a surface that reads plugins from the FX bin - such as my trusty Alphatrack now resurrected to full working order due to the fine work by Alexey with his AZ plugin - how would it make sense of controls exposed from all those various places? All I can say is hopefully someone smarter than me, or at least a good deal more patient, will apply themselves to this problem at some point...

Beepster

Anderton

subtlearts
It would sure be nice to have the PC modules expose their controls to control surfaces though. Is there an active FR for this?

FWIW controls for some PC modules are exposed to MIDI learn: QuadCurve EQ, Tube, S-Type Bus Compressor, and PC-76 U-Type Compressor. The others can be automated, but aren't exposed to controllers...but I would think if some modules could expose their controls, others could too.

Okay... this kind of explains a MASSIVE frustration I had a while back when I was going through my first round of learning (during the X2 release). I chalked it up to me being too stupid to breathe (in a digital production sense) but if there are certain controls that refuse to map to MIDI controllers then, well I gotta say that is kind of screwed up and confusing as fartballs.
 
Essentially back then I was trying my best to set up my controller (just a small keyboard controller and a pad controller but both of which have assignable knobs/faders/etc) to adjust things... all following the directions in the manual. It was all very hit or miss and I got frustrated and because of that have only recently started going back down that rabbit hole (where I am discovering other quirks and limitations).
 
I kind of figured that ANYTHING that can be tweaked should be able to be mapped/MIDI learned. Especially something so crucial and "designed for convenience" like the ProChannel strip. This does indeed explain why some things would provide MIDI learn (and work) while other things wouldn't.
 
I guess as a novice that is kind of disheartening and frustrating. As someone who is now getting into these more advanced type of external control functions I gotta say... why the heck is this NOT the standard?
 
Perhaps MIDI control stuff is one of the things the Bakers should start fixing up/improving now that the program is fully matured. I was poking around at some of the mapping on the "cheap" DAW and was blown away at how easy and through it was. I attempted some of the same stuff in Sonar but all that seemed to be available was basic transport and it was really quite strange and convoluted. Now knowing that MIDI learn is a "maybe/maybe not" type situation... well that could certainly all be fixed and perhaps make the platform even more desirable.
 
Not freaking out (mostly) but that does seem like a serious limitation in this day and age. I've heard tell of Cake more focusing on "touch" as opposed to MIDI control but really that helps me not one whit... nor does it help the folks who spent enormous piles of cash on those fancy, Sonar specific control surfaces.
 
Okay, that is a little ranty and freaky but seriously... not p*ssed and it is one thing I accept about Sonar however it really REALLY would be something nice to get worked on. It would be good for the product and coax some of the live on the fly tweakers to consider Sonar as viable.
 
Seriously not yelling or angry. Just befuddled really.
 
Peace.

Automaton and MIDI control of everything should be super easy to set up on the fly and shouldn't have to involve anything like the horrors of ACT. The way Sonar handles MIDI learn is just awful and I've never really gotten the hang of it. Other DAWs sure seem to have made it a lot easier. I'm not even looking to turn my controller into a full blown mixing desk, most of the time all I want is to map a couple of rotary knobs to a couple of effect parameters and record some twiddling on a track. This is NOT user friendly in Sonar and it should be. Oftentimes it's downright impossible. I've said it before, but Sonar should be able to map any MIDI controller to any envelope. If we can control something with an envelope, we should be able to map a controller to that envelope. I'll never be fully happy with the program until that happens.

Just to be clear, I was referring to MIDI Learn as being available for only certain ProChannel parameters. If you use ACT or the V-Studio, more ProChannel modules are controllable by ACT...although the success/predictability is hit or miss with external controllers.
 
Remember when setting up ACT not to assign a MIDI out to your controller, ACT isn't bi-directional. I agree that ACT can be ugly, which is why I use a simplified approach that sorta works...mostly...at least it's good enough for what I want to do. 

Beepster
simultanwously
 
There I go making up new werds again. I kinda like that one. lol

That's the Welsh spelling...;-)

Anderton

subtlearts
It would sure be nice to have the PC modules expose their controls to control surfaces though. Is there an active FR for this?

FWIW controls for some PC modules are exposed to MIDI learn: QuadCurve EQ, Tube, S-Type Bus Compressor, and PC-76 U-Type Compressor. The others can be automated, but aren't exposed to controllers...but I would think if some modules could expose their controls, others could too.

There are 2 families of Pro Channels, those developed by Cake and those by third Parties. It's the stuff that are developed by third parties that act differently. I don't know how easiliy it would be to get those changed. Would cake have to go back to the companies and get them to change them, or would they be able to edit their functions themselves?
 
It's easy to identify which are which, when some seems cakewalk, but are actually overloud (I think it's Overloud from previous reading) such as the the Console emulators. When you click on a control, if four white corners appears to show that they the control is  'in focus', then Cake made it, if they don't appear, then cake didn't. So all the console, track and cakewalk PC channels have extra functionality than the non cakewalk Prochannels. Easily checked by clicking, seeing the 4 white corners and using your plus and minus keys to move them. If they move, cakewalk, if they  don't, then 3rd party.

The console emulators really offer nothing that I can hear or sense.  Subtle is too obvious a way to describe it.  I use them sometimes but I can't say I get it.