lfm


I have now been running X1 Trial a little bit and kind of like it.

They did not destroy as much as I feared according to Cake advertisements - X1 changes everything.

I see no boost in my own way of working yet - but I feared they would actually destroy the basics.

But I have not been into full depth of everything you do for a final mix - just playing with tutorial projects.

There is just one thing that bothers me to death right now:

- Why clutter inspector with other tracks than what you selected?

If I want to inspect a bus - I just select that for all details.

I hope we can turn this off - at least in X2 when I'm about to upgrade 8.5.

ONLY RELEVANT INFO IN INSPECTOR PLEASE!

The overall feel of X1 is very positive for me.

sykodelic


I think we're getting to the point now, where almost all crashing that's not related to faulty hardware, comes from badly coded plugins. Even if they worked perfectly on Sonar 8.5, it doesn't mean they are programmed correctly according to VST standards. Don't underestimate the shoddy programming that happens out there. 

I think Cake should just pay Scott loads of money to write the manual

chaunceyc


Yes - If you like it that way you'll probably find that you just have to keep resetting the width manually every few minutes, since most people don't need to see anything at the top of their inspector (when the clip or track or prochannel completely covers up the top third of it), it is only an extra 3-4 mouseclicks and a drag each time you want to go back and forth between these regularly used features.    You could probably create an additional screenset for each of these states - if you have 8 screensets now, simply add 6 more for each of the permutations and combinations of the clip/track/prochannel, then re-import them to each project as needed. Choose screenset 17 when you want the clip pane covered up, choose screenset 26 when you want the busless view, set 31 when you want track view without the tab showing, etc.


Simple! :)

Making inspector width dependent upon the ever toggling clip/track/pc tab panes didn't make a lot of sense to me.   However, I love the elegant implementation in this competing product I'm using called Sonar 8.5. 

chaunceyc

l

I was being a bit facetious there - there is a constant chorus of people suggesting screensets to basically "solve" problems introduced by the X1 "streamlining".  This is just one example where the basic functioning of the new layout forces you to have a bigass inspector showing the bus whether you want it there or not.  I like having an inspector there all the time, but liked it when it was about an inch wide, now it is over twice that and reverts back to that 21 square inches every time I need to access clip / track / prochannel properties.  The old way of viewing a properties dialog box in the center of the page where it disappeared magically (with a simple enter or escape) when you were done with it was infinitely better and demonstrably so--way less mouse travel and you didn't need (yet another mouse click) to make it go away.  Adding endless layers of screensets and having to remember what each one of them is for situations like this borders on the ridiculous, in my opinion.  How did we get along so well without them in editions past?

RonARomano


Not sure I'll ever get to determining whether or not X1 is stable on my system, which runs 8.5.3 pretty much flawlessly in both 32- and 64-bit modes (thanks AGAIN to ADK for having the foresight to install both versions on this system when they built it - still can't do QT video on 64-bit thanks to Apple).

The reason I'm not likely to find out whether it's stable is that it's unusable, i.e., I simply don't have the time to completely RELEARN how to use SONAR. Even with the "legacy" key bindings, practically EVERYTHING about how I work in 8.5.3 has changed in X1.

I right-click on a clip ... I can no longer get at the clip properties to do audio stretching, etc. Instead, I have no fewer than four grouping mouse clicks to be sure the clip is selected, open the ProChannel window, click Clip, select the group of parameters I want to see. Huh? This is "better"?? In what way?

I type 'C' to split an audio clip... the 'tool' I get won't split the clip - it's some sort of dipsh!t cropping tool that is indistinguishable from the normal cursor as far as I can see.

When editing in the piano roll, I type 'B' to scrub... nothing. Type 'S' to select... nothing. I can't even FIND the tool palette for this view anymore... Oh, WAIT... I have to un-minimize the piano roll view every frakking time I want to change tools, so that I can see the idiotic 'universal' tool palette. Even then, the Draw tool won't adjust the edges or other parameters of MIDI notes. What??? And even if I wanted to waste my time learning the new function keys... they don't work in the piano roll. Meanwhile, I'm hitting 'D' for DRAW and I see sh!t happening BEHIND the piano roll view in the track view!! WTF???!? I still haven't figured out how to Scrub. I'm guessing it's in the manual somewhere... some detail that explains to me how to do something I already know how to do in 8.5.3, which I'll just have to keep using because I have work to do.

Who the hell does this kind of crap to their customer base on a new release??? Oh, I know... 'read the manual'. Guess what: I already read that (which was essentially worthless AND had to be augmented by Scott's book) when I learned to use 8.5. Now I have to start over? Sorry, I don't think so.

Piss poor job, Cakewalk. Really piss poor. This is just added motivation to get a Mac and move to MOTU Digital Performer. Either way, as a Cakewalk user since Pro-Audio 8, it pains me to say that this is most likely the very last version of any Cakewalk product I'll be spending money on.

chaunceyc

lfm

chaunceyc


Yes - If you like it that way you'll probably find that you just have to keep resetting the width manually every few minutes, since most people don't need to see anything at the top of their inspector (when the clip or track or prochannel completely covers up the top third of it), it is only an extra 3-4 mouseclicks and a drag each time you want to go back and forth between these regularly used features.    You could probably create an additional screenset for each of these states - if you have 8 screensets now, simply add 6 more for each of the permutations and combinations of the clip/track/prochannel, then re-import them to each project as needed. Choose screenset 17 when you want the clip pane covered up, choose screenset 26 when you want the busless view, set 31 when you want track view without the tab showing, etc.


Simple! :)

Making inspector width dependent upon the ever toggling clip/track/pc tab panes didn't make a lot of sense to me.   However, I love the elegant implementation in this competing product I'm using called Sonar 8.5. 

Thanks. Seems it will be worth looking very deep into how to use screensets for various purposes.

And I agree that activating the tabs in view to open like a menu, ontop of everything instead as a child to that view(and widens it) would be better. But maybe that conflicts with other abilitlites to manage and float it, I don't know.

I was being a bit facetious there - there is a constant chorus of people suggesting screensets to basically "solve" problems introduced by the X1 "streamlining".  This is just one example where the basic functioning of the new layout forces you to have a bigass inspector showing the bus whether you want it there or not.  I like having an inspector there all the time, but liked it when it was about an inch wide, now it is over twice that and reverts back to that 21 square inches every time I need to access clip / track / prochannel properties.  The old way of viewing a properties dialog box in the center of the page where it disappeared magically (with a simple enter or escape) when you were done with it was infinitely better and demonstrably so--way less mouse travel and you didn't need (yet another mouse click) to make it go away.  Adding endless layers of screensets and having to remember what each one of them is for situations like this borders on the ridiculous, in my opinion.  How did we get along so well without them in editions past?

cornieleous


I'm still waiting for someone from Cakewalk to give some thought to this (why would you force us to use a view), but lately it seems like they are all on the defensive even when valid arguments are presented.