The Grim
some time back wasn't there a thought/discussion or something like that, that the pro channel itself was perhaps going to be discarded?

I believe what you are referring to is the feature request for a prochannel position marker in the FX Bin. So you wouldn't have to have the ProChannel as either post or pre but somewhere in the middle if necessary.

scook
When it comes to third party PC modules, it takes two to create them. Is there any evidence that Tony Frenzel has expressed interest in creating plug-ins for the format?
 
For whatever reason, Cakewalk has chosen not to expand their PC offerings either. Both the LP EQ and LP MB could have been created in PC format.

But I think cakewalk should be more proactive. When feature requests are in for a VU meter in PC. And you have a small one man producer that has one of the most highly regard VU plugins and at a low cost of 11 dollars, then I think it would be great if Cakewalk represented us, approached him to facilitate it being made available. It's cakes format, working with him instea of just giving him the instructions, then promoting it on the cakewalk site is a win all round.
 
What do we have no, 30 PC modules. All ranging from good to great. but nothing new in the last year. I hope this hasn't fallen off the radar like so many other things.

John

Kamikaze

chuckebaby
I wish someone could figure out how to code VST's to fit in the pro channel.
Would be a life saver here as most of my set up is using PC templates.
With PC templates, everything is loaded, all EQ, modules (FX).
 
Imagine a world where any plug in could be turned in to a module.
 

At least allow them to be inserted into the channel as a fly out option. Especially for the larger ones.

 

This is a brilliant idea. 

It's so simple too, in that it's basically an FX Chain, with just one VST, no controls. I don't know the terminology. But it's just a stripped down FX chain shell, and like the FX chain, it can be inserted anywhere on the PC chain, post,pre in the middle. 
 
How hard can this be to implement, and it resolves several common issues. The GUI is made in the PC headers, the routing is already coded with FX chains. I took the triangle pointer from the QuadEQ Flyout. 
 
Fo me this would do away with FX bins and look tidier for it

But... the prochannel has a VU meter?

Do you mean the VU meters in the Console emulators? I believe these are very approximate. Reading Jeff Evans comments on these, it seems there's a lot more involved for them to be useful. I don't know I just bought them yesterday.
 
http://forum.cakewalk.com/FindPost/3520053

I'd still like to see the MJUC (by the same maker) as a pro-channel module.  

Seems to me you could just have the fx bins behave like this( open as a list in column etc). I hate having two systems to deal with. I like the EQ fly out, but automatically want to reposition it like a "real" vst.

I know for a fact that Noel and Tony have been in touch because I set up the email exchange at the time I noticed that SDRR VST3 problem I mentioned earlier. Noel got him an NFR version of Sonar right away and tried to follow up. Tony was quick to admit the issue was probably in his code, not Sonar, but it's been two years and there have been no SDRR updates. So I don't think, in this specific case at least, Cakewalk is the party to be blamed for inaction.