Why Does an Effect Show Up in the Synth Rack??

Maybe it's been defined as a synth (accidentally or for some weird reason) instead of an effect in the Plugin Manager?

dysamoria


i didn't know that was possible with DX plugs. The Sonitus stuff is all DX.

I didn't come to think of that. I don't know.

Interesting question. dysamoria, have you asked Cakewalk about this? 

I have no idea how SONAR distinguishes DX synths from effects. VSTs, of course, have flags in the registry for that. But I took a look and could find nothing comparable to the isSynth flag for the Sonitus Delay. (CLSID {C54E2D90-F9CA-11D2-8C30-00805FE9FC03} if you're playing along at home. Another curiosity to ask CW about: how is it the delay and gate are able to coexist with the same CLSID?)

What I would do is unregister and re-register sonitusfxdelay.dll. If there is a corrupt registry key somewhere that's causing SONAR to think it's a synth, that may clear it up.

i've not asked Cakwalk support this specific question yet. i'm afraid of the answer, actually. In comparison to not getting total recall when opening older projects, the FX loaded into the Synth Rack is a meaningless weirdness to me, because at least it WORKS and the settings are visible, should i choose to remove and recreate the effect plug-in's presence in my project. With missing plug-ins (which aren't actually missing): Cakewalk support has so far unhelpfully suggested that i remove instances of missing plug-ins and load new ones, which loses me all my plug-in settings. That's no solution. It's also annoying to me that the response to my help request was pointing fingers at the plug-in as being a problem instead of Sonar being the problem (which it is). It's all to do with these foolish architectural choices in using CLSID instead of VST ID and storing things in the registry instead of plain text files within the application folder or user-settings folder. i HATE the registry. If not for all my Sonar content (which Sonar is refusing to let me have access to), i'd convert to Mac entirely. i started the process and my work in Sonar was the only roadblock. After all these years of seeing how bad the registry idea is, Microsoft and developers have not at all stepped back from it.

i prefer the system on the Mac and it is very different. Individual preference and settings files don't all get loaded into memory; the registry does. Individual files are easier to manage (browse, locate & eliminate), unlike the registry keys, which are heavily nested, not very human readable, and are also duplicated in several parts of the registry. Individual files are not one big monolithic corruptible database like the registry. It's a central point of failure. Individual files don't lead to an eternally growing monolithic database like the registry. Look at how people firmly believe that Windows machines need regular reloading from scratch. They believe this because it's actually true. The registry is why. Et cetera.

i've hated it since at least Windows 2000. Before that, i wasn't experienced enough as a tech to have learned to hate it. Now i don't even offer my services as a tech any more because i'm sick of troubleshooting a system that's designed with so much overhead. It's just a sick land to work in.

i have mostly hated all computers and platforms equally ;-), but  i admit that, as a tech person being "reborn as a user," i've come to appreciate the Mac/Apple way. i don't like multi-user systems (more overhead when it's just ME using my systems) and i hate Unixy stuff (but if i have to use it, i'd rather it be Apple's version - yes, i know Windows isn't a Unix).

Any way... off topic, as i am so easily distracted by various technical nonsense... i did finally ask tech support about this specific problem. If i get an interesting response, i'll post it here.

bitflipper

i've hated it since at least Windows 2000.

Well, not to pull seniority on you but I've hated Windows since 3.0! 
I wasn't much impressed with 2.0 either, but I wasn't a user then so it didn't matter.

Heh heh... To be honest, i was anti-Windows at 3.0, too, thinking that i was much more effective at the command line for file processing (it was more a DOS user arrogance thing). i grew out of that when Win95 came along. That was clearly superior to CLI and i was sick of CLI at that point any way (yet, i was about to embark on more CLI use in Linux and BeOS, which pushed me over the limit). i was briefly satisfied with Windows between 95 and 98 and only came to learn how much i hated it along the way, while MS was making itself known for what it was.


Any way...