MIDI Input of "None" Actually Means "ALL"

oh just another one for ya:



you would expect this "None" pictured here to mean that this MIDI track will accept NO input right?  

WRONG.

it actually accepts ALL input.  It right currently playing the MIDI-out data from my bass track into my Drums!!!!   
 
In order for me to get it to NOT hear MIDI notes from other tracks, I need to manually select my MIDI controller every time.   This is just totally ridiculous.

oh and the best part of this, is that I put some MIDI volume automation on one of my tracks, and it is effecting the volume (CC 7 data) on my other tracks, because of this bug!!!

Its seriously time to leave Cakewalk.  They have had these issues for years and refuse to fix.

brundlefly
 
Good luck finding another DAW that doesn't just have a different set of 'unpreferred' behaviors and limitations.

Amen to this.

brundlefly
Disable 'Always Echo Current MIDI Track' in preferences. SONAR cant 'always echo' nothing so it enables all inputs, not knowing which one you intend. This is working as intended, just not the way you would prefer.
 
Good luck finding another DAW that doesn't just have a different set of 'unpreferred' behaviors and limitations.

this is not the problem.  its not even the "current" midi track.  its all over the place.

In addition to a real 'None' for input, I have been wanting a real 'None' for output for years.  It would be great to be able to 'park' clips in a track with its output set to 'None'
 
But ... it is what it is

SilverBlueMedallion
I wouldn't say I am offensive.   I am simply stating how I feel.  Offensive would mean I personally offended someone.  I am simply being harsh on a product.  Is the software feeling hurt?

 
Not everyone thinks your personal issues are of great universal interest, especially because apparently they don't impact that many people. Yet you demand a lot of bandwidth in a forum whose intention is to help users get the most out of SONAR. And often when people offer solutions or workarounds, you dismiss them as not being what you want, thus causing those people to feel they've wasted their time - which they have. (As to the initial post, I just use Quick Grouping - two clicks - to select the virtual controller. This effectively turns off all inputs, and then I have several options for track selection for recording, depending on the application - as well as instant access to the virtual controller on the QWERTY keyboard if I need to do a quick sound check.)
 
All software has limitations. Most people accept whatever limitations exist in the software they've chosen, and if not, they try to find software whose limitations don't affect what they do. When I switched from two other DAWs to SONAR, I didn't go to their forums and complain about features they didn't have, or bugs they did have, compared to SONAR. I didn't post any dramatic "I'm leaving XX and XX DAWs." I simply evaluated my needs, tested all the DAWs out there, made a choice, and got back to work. I don't have time for, or interest in, drama (mine or anyone else's).
 
I do have the advantage of having run sessions with all major DAWs and most minor ones, and I judged SONAR's limitations to be less relevant to what I do than other DAWs. So, I chose SONAR and learned it - strengths and limitations - so I could get work done that has since then encompassed award-winning mastering, hundreds of (actually maybe even over a thousand) audio-for-video soundtracks, commercials, narration, recording my own material, and doing multiple mixes as well as remixes for a variety of artists. 
 
As I've often said to the guys at Cakewalk, if I found a DAW that suited my needs better, I'd switch in a heartbeat. I recommend you do the same. However you might want to check out their forums first. All software forums have the same threads: this function is broken, support sucks, hey it should really do this function, I lost hours of work because of XX (although of course the real answer to that is always "back up your work"), etc. etc. "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose..."
 
 

Anderton

SilverBlueMedallion
I wouldn't say I am offensive.   I am simply stating how I feel.  Offensive would mean I personally offended someone.  I am simply being harsh on a product.  Is the software feeling hurt?

 
Not everyone thinks your personal issues are of great universal interest, especially because apparently they don't impact that many people. Yet you demand a lot of bandwidth in a forum whose intention is to help users get the most out of SONAR. And often when people offer solutions or workarounds, you dismiss them as not being what you want, thus causing those people to feel they've wasted their time - which they have. (As to the initial post, I just use Quick Grouping - two clicks - to select the virtual controller. This effectively turns off all inputs, and then I have several options for track selection for recording, depending on the application - as well as instant access to the virtual controller on the QWERTY keyboard if I need to do a quick sound check.)
 
All software has limitations. Most people accept whatever limitations exist in the software they've chosen, and if not, they try to find software whose limitations don't affect what they do. When I switched from two other DAWs to SONAR, I didn't go to their forums and complain about features they didn't have, or bugs they did have, compared to SONAR. I didn't post any dramatic "I'm leaving XX and XX DAWs." I simply evaluated my needs, tested all the DAWs out there, made a choice, and got back to work. I don't have time for, or interest in, drama (mine or anyone else's).
 
I do have the advantage of having run sessions with all major DAWs and most minor ones, and I judged SONAR's limitations to be less relevant to what I do than other DAWs. So, I chose SONAR and learned it - strengths and limitations - so I could get work done that has since then encompassed award-winning mastering, hundreds of (actually maybe even over a thousand) audio-for-video soundtracks, commercials, narration, recording my own material, and doing multiple mixes as well as remixes for a variety of artists. 
 
As I've often said to the guys at Cakewalk, if I found a DAW that suited my needs better, I'd switch in a heartbeat. I recommend you do the same. However you might want to check out their forums first. All software forums have the same threads: this function is broken, support sucks, hey it should really do this function, I lost hours of work because of XX (although of course the real answer to that is always "back up your work"), etc. etc. "Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose..."
 
 

 
I think the reason maybe my issues are something 'the masses' are concerned with is because serious MIDI programmers are using other products by now.  The MIDI engine is SERIOUSLY flawed if you go through my posts.  Creative workflow is literally destroyed by spending hours of time trying to fix what should just work.

I also don't demand anything.  I simply post.  If I get zero responses, I get zero responses.  I just feel these frustrations SHOULD be aired! Why not, right?

You are making it like I don't appreciate the time people spend on workarounds.  I definitely do, and I have thanked you PERSONALLY many times for your help (which I still do).  I think you are a nice person, I've watched your videos on YouTube.  Stand up guy.   I just feel you also get a little too sensitive when it comes to defending Cakewalk.  Now, you might have a vested interest in defending them, but still.  

"All software has limitations" - not an argument.

I am not talking about limitations. I am talking about TRUE decade-long bugs that have hindered my workflow.  I also feel the actual limitations are much less workflow-effecting in other DAWs.   

The title of my post was not to spark drama, as it SHOULDN'T.  No one should care if one stranger they don't know isn't using their favorite DAW anymore.   The reason is to catch the eye of Cakewalk staff to hopefully work on these issues!   I see this post as a positive!  it is a catch all for the MIDI Developers and sums up where they need to start work next.

I will say that Sonar I feel might be the best when it comes to audio editing.  It really is top notch, and continue to stand by that notion.  I will also continue to say its MIDI implementation might be one of the worst.

Of course other software's forums will have posts of people leaving and having major issues.   It always happens, but perhaps its more to do with the audio based stuff, where Sonar shines!

Cubase seems to be the mother of all MIDI DAW's and there must be a reason for it.   I am going to look into that as well.   

If only Sonar resolved its decade-long MIDI issues, I truly feel it could be the best DAW on the market, but until that time, I cannot say that it is (if you are working with MIDI that is).

tenfoot
Without entering into the intricacies of the debate that follows, it is pretty damned hard to argue with the OP's premise. As much as I love SONAR, it is freakin' bonkers that 'all inputs omni' behaves the same as 'none'. There really is not a logical argument on earth to justify this long standing lunacy:)

from my experience, there is no "NONE".. unless I buy a new MIDI controller to plug in and set the input to that and make sure I never hit a key on it. LOL

Sanderxpander
That one has been a PITA for ages to me too.

Its been posted before, even sent to Cakewalk directly... who just ignore.

MarioD

Sanderxpander
That one has been a PITA for ages to me too.

You are not alone!

 
i know. 

abacab
I have noticed this "None" feature too ... I wonder if anybody has submitted an official bug report to Cakewalk? 
 
IMHO, discussing bugs on the forum may sometimes bring attention of Cake staff.  But it appears that it must be a very major bug that affects many users to get attention here.  Venting here will not fix anything.
 
For a relatively minor bug, even if it's a major annoyance to a few, the problem report system is still probably the most effective way to improve Sonar for us all.
 
http://www.cakewalk.com/S...Contact/Problem-Report

 
i have, and it most certainly is not minor, as it leads to data loss.

ralf
If you enable in the preferences the automated echo for the selected track, then "none" becomes "omni" for the selected track. This is useful, because you can switch your keyboard to a track simply by selecting it.
 
If you disable automated echo, "none" is none and stays none. Then, you can echo single tracks and select whatever input you like, be it an explicit midi channel of a particular midi input, be it midi omni for all inputs, or be it none to silent it.
 
I think this a completely consistent logic. But it depends on the automated echo in the preferences. Turn it off, if you don't want Sonar to have "none" behave like "all" for the selected track.

OK, but still, shouldn't only the track selected have the "None" set to "Omni" then?  And even then, it should only listen from the keyboard.  

Every project I work on has synth MIDI out making its way to tracks that shouldn't be getting it.

ralf

azslow3

ralf
If you enable in the preferences the automated echo for the selected track, then "none" becomes "omni" for the selected track. This is useful, because you can switch your keyboard to a track simply by selecting it.
 
If you disable automated echo, "none" is none and stays none. Then, you can echo single tracks and select whatever input you like, be it an explicit midi channel of a particular midi input, be it midi omni for all inputs, or be it none to silent it.
 
I think this a completely consistent logic. But it depends on the automated echo in the preferences. Turn it off, if you don't want Sonar to have "none" behave like "all" for the selected track.

If I disable echo and not recording... then ANY input settings becomes "none" and stay none. "None" (as none) make any sense if (and only if) whatever you do there will be no input.
 
Sorry to say, but current "completely consistent logic" remind me about very old joke: "To prevent infections, use condom... but more important, avoid sex" 

That's not what I said. All I said is that you have two options. Turn automated echo on, then "none" will become "omni" for the selected track, which is pretty useful to quickly change the input for your keyboard by selecting a track. Turn automated echo off, then you have to manually enable and disable echo for each track, which gives you direct control without any surprises. Pretty simple, and it's your choice. But enabling automated echo and then complaining that it doesn't know if you want it to be active or not at the very moment ...

As clearly stated in the OP, this thread is not about workarounds we all know. Yes, there is an option to turn Echo off. And when it is off, the input is irrelevant.
But the thread about the meaning of the word "None" which is always "Omni". If the Echo is off, it is still Omni, but since the input is irrelevant it works as "None", the same way as let say "Kawai DP / MIDI Ch 1" is also works as "None".
 
As you have written, automatic Echo (lets not call it "automated", since this word is normally used for Track Automations) is pretty useful. If you have several tracks and you change the focus to play different synth by changing the track in focus (Sonar does have easy mappable to keyboard/MIDI functions for that, but not for switching directly to specific track), at some moment you can temporarily switch to track you do not want to play. Fancy things can happened then, especially when some of Synth has MIDI output enabled. Not only some notes can be audible, arbitrary (!) parameters inside this synth can be invisibly (!) changed in case some other synth sends CC and this synth react on them. Unlike notes, changes in parameters are permanent (!). You can not "undo" them, they are not reverted on transport stop, they can be invisible. You save your project and it is "corrupted", without any way to find why.
 
I repeat, we know workarounds. Adding external "MIDI Loop" which is never used and setting track input to it is the (only?) way to truly set track input to "None". But "completely consistent logic" should respect the meaning of the word "None". I do not think there can be any second opinion on that... 
 
 

MarioD

Sanderxpander
That one has been a PITA for ages to me too.

You are not alone!

++++++1