Oh yeah, both the other guys have folder tracks that have a volume control.  How handy is that?  What's in the folder can be volume adjusted as a group.  <Sorry for slipping into rant mode.> 

Mod Bod

Yep, nice that.
Some other stuff as well In S1.


Folder TracksBus/output macro selector for tracks in folder.
Add bus with folder name.
Acts as effects drop target for selected bus/output.
Can hold automation envelops.
Acts as a Group creator.
Changes group name if folder name is changed. 

The IN and OUT buttons for Auto Punch don't work. So you have to go back to the SO2 GUI to set up punch points. Kind of defeats the Tranzport purpose, if you ask me. The other buttons seem to work fine.

Thanks, Dave. That would have been yet another deal-killer for me, if the Tranzport didn't work with S1. I don't record with auto punch, so that limitation isn't a big deal. As long as the Undo button works, I'm OK.

Jeff, how's it with multi-timbral synths? I was never able to try that on my version of Studio One, as I had the "Artist" edition. Handling of multi-out synths was very cumbersome in Reaper. This is something that SONAR does quite well, as long as you stay away from those hokey Instrument Tracks. But it seems to me that Studio One is a lot like Reaper in that regard. Have you loaded up Kontakt with multiple instruments in S1 yet?

Hi Dave. My hardware multi timbral instruments send through analog multiple outputs to a digital mixer.

As far as VST's that feature multiple outputs here is how it works even in the current version 1 of Pro. Well you simply choose the correct type of VST when inserting an instrument. I am using Kontakt 4 player. For this there are three versions, Kontakt, Kontakt 8 Out and Kontakt 16 Out.  (I think full version offers 32 voices eg 16 stereo outs)

In the mixer page you can choose to view a mini synth rack which is handy. Under each synth is a menu that engages the extra outputs as required. The 8 Out Kontakt is only 4 stereo pairs and the 16 out is 8 stereo pairs. As you check each set of outputs a new mixer channel appears. The number of available outputs depends on the plugin. Reaktor 5 has 4 stereo pairs, Wusik has many outs, their own drum machine Impact has 8 stereo and 8 mono outs (total of 16 mixer tracks) Cakewalk Session Drummer 3 offers many outputs too. Many synths have two outs only of course. (one stereo pair)

The extra tracks can appear on the arrange window as you are building a sequence to a multi timbral setup. You can show/hide all the multi outs too when viewing the mixer. You can just see it as a single mixer channel or a group of stereo/mono stems. There is some reference to this as well in the new update so some of the multi out features I think have been improved. You can certainly create a start template so you don't have to do this everytime.

Using a VST this way is a good thing. If it has the voices available, it can stack up a few sounds and do quite a few parts at once all with one instance of it. But feeding separate mixer channels for better and more detailed processing.  It's like using our Kurzweils to do 4 parts and send those out the four stereo pairs on the back. I limit the number of parts I expect a hardware sampler to do by the number of physical outputs it has got (8 in most cases) or 4 stereo stems hence 4 parts. You could think of the VST's the same way. eg use Kontakt with 8 outs or 16 outs to do 4 or 8 parts respectively. The mixer is going to get quite busy but showing/hiding should control that.

Jeff, so if working with an instance of, say, Impact, you can have 16 separate MIDI tracks and 16 separate audio tracks? If so, does it automatically give you all of them and require you to get rid of the ones you don't want, or ask you which ones you want?

Pick up a groove3.com 30 day free pass and watch the Studio One tutorial. It's a decent run through.

Er... I thought this was the Cakewalk support forum? Maybe some of you should register at the Presonus forum. 

Er hellogoodbye this is in fact the correct place to talk about these things. We are in the Software section and in fact discussion on non Cakewalk software as well. It is a good place to talk about things like how certain plugins from other creators might work inside Sonar and also comparing other DAW's and how they operate and might think compared to Sonar doing similar functions. It is all good and healthy and who knows they might even be taking notice.

At the moment we are talking about how Studio One handles multi output VST's. Dave  is wanting to know as he and others may be considering working with an alternative DAW at some point. Some of us use more than one application. I also work with FL Studio as well and that too is quite a different and interesting program.

It is OK to compare software programs on a general level and come to the conclusion that one is not significantly better or worse than the other. But sometimes a very specific feature might come along and it may be a lot better than another program and could easily be deciding factor in not so much changing your DAW necessarily but adding another to your tool box.

With me for example Studio One has the ability to setup a bunch of either external or virtual instruments and allocate them to tracks and switch tracks all while looping, in record or going in and out of record/play etc and without glitching or creating any gaps in the audio. This feature is simply not available in Sonar and Sonar simply cannot do it. You can stop of course but it is making you work a certain way.

So if you are someone who wants to input data this seamless on the go track switching way and another program may be better at doing that so you work with it. It requires that you can play better but if you can then it may be a revelation. Imagine playing two handed on two keyboards and organising two foot switches to do this while you are playing. (I am working on it) This is what happened to me. I discovered this seamless track switching by accident.  In the end I found myself working in the program more and more for longer and staying in the program eventually to complete productions. Now I am mastering in the program too as does Craig Anderton.

To think that Studio One is just some simplistic thing that is good for getting ideas down quickly and Sonar is some way more complex deep thing that gets serious is incorrect thinking. They are both fine applications and can take ideas to deep complex finished results. So we all know musical ideas far transcend the DAW in use so the end result will always be pretty similar.

But some DAW's might also allow you to make musical ideas in a different way. FL Studio is one of those programs. The step sequencer makes you do things very differently. With that little miniature keyboard at the bottom of the step sequencer you can like throw paint at the wall or brush a whole lot of notes in a random way and musical ideas result. Now you cannot do this quite the same way in Sonar or Studio One but in FL you can so you might get in there and experiment for a while. It is interesting. Moving data back and forth is easy these days as well. I find you can stay right inside FL Studio to the end too and make great music using all their synths and plugins in production. That will come out sounding quite different to a Sonar or Studio One production. FL has a definite sound for sure. They are all great, not so much only one is good and all the others are not so good.

I am mixing a track right now that is difficult and I am having a hard time with it mainly due to the way things were tracked. It was done in Sonar and I am doing trying to mix it in 8.5. I am about to try consolidating tracks and import the whole thing into Studio One as the last job I mixed in Studio One sounds amazing. I have always believed that Sonar sounded as good as anything out there but it may turn out that the track comes together and sounds better in Studio One. (I am very fair in this regard!) I will report on that later. What if that turns out to be the case and the whole program just sounds better. Would that be a good enough reason to switch and maybe stop using another DAW? Features or less features, it should be the most important reason to use any DAW. There is the Hi Fi in me coming out again.

Now, if S1 could import *.cwp files, that would be the cat's pajamas.....

All I'm saying is that when I have some creative juices flowing, I head right for Studio One and have a track set up, armed and recording before I can even answer the Sonar initial questions. 


Not my experience at all. The only thing better in S1 is gapless audio. It's actually pretty buggy for a simple DAW.

digitalboy


  Can we end this thread soon ? Just the title is enough to make me sick and after reading a couple of the posts I had to lie down with a serious case of vertigo

The music seems to be taking a back seat to all of this babble and that's never a good thing 

Remember the days when everyone in the band had ONE instrument and we were happy to make music together and that we thought we were doing good things for the world ?

Lets get back there and enjoy making music again - not just talking about it  

+1
 

Jeff Evans


Er hellogoodbye this is in fact the correct place to talk about these things. We are in the Software section and in fact discussion on non Cakewalk software as well.  

Oops, sorry, you're right! I switch between the subforums all the time and completely forgot this. And even though my post was not to be taken too seriously, I do stand corrected. 

I think the time the BAKERS are investing in X2 will see the launch of a better implemented DAW2 which will hopefully bring it to the status that Ableton, Studio One are in at the present. As I know it has been said that Sonar is good but it is not gapless. That is why many people do not use Sonar.

Dappa1


Sonar has many years to plant it's feet firmly in the DAW world. It has been a world leader for many years and it comes with a wealth of plug ins which I would agree have been topnotch. It was one of the first to introduce 64bit and today it works well with jbridge or bitbridge. It's new design and drag and drop technology makes X1 better than any other DAW on the market...plus it just works and it's workflow is second to none!
 

Dappa1


I think the time the BAKERS are investing in X2 will see the launch of a better implemented DAW2 which will hopefully bring it to the status that Ableton, Studio One are in at the present. As I know it has been said that Sonar is good but it is not gapless. That is why many people do not use Sonar.

 

I'm a little confused at which status you're taking? Within 5 pages from starting this thread, it seems like you've contradicted yourself......
 
 

bitflipper

Sonar is ... not gapless. That is why many people do not use Sonar

Please excuse my ignorance, but what does this mean, exactly?

It seems to have evolved as specific Sonar forum speak for the ability to loop over sections without fear of the glitching at the repeat points that Sonar can seem to specialise in whilst doing so.  Hence 'gapless'.

If you're not affected by it then it is of no concern but to many of us, including me, it has been a long-standing annoyance.