John T
 
 
Well, I think a little knowledge is a dangerous thing here. 

The supreme irony being that anyone with a 'little knowledge' would know that Alexander Pope's original quote states that "A little learning is a dangerous thing"
 
BTW John (T), I believe there's a thread in the Coffee House you left hanging with a lot of unanswered questions - friendly questions (and a few friendly remarks) if I remember correctly. If I could accurately recall the quotation that includes the words "can't", "stand", "heat" and "kitchen" I'd use it here.
 
Carry on
 
 

John T

Jonbouy

It's off and hidden by default. So yes, there is a complete non-appearance of it if preferred. In fact, there is a complete non-appearance of it even before you express a preference.

No it's there and using up some resources however minimal from the get go, the VX64 is NOT!

Cakewalk have said it takes up no resources when off. I think Brandon says so in this very thread. I'm happy to assume they're not lying.

I think he means taking up cpu or memory.

It clutters inspector view whether you used it yet or not - that is also resources.

And I don't find a marker on a track that makes you quickly see if it's invoked or not.
Just playing with trial just now and wonder how that is.

John T

It clutters inspector view whether you used it yet or not - that is also resources.

No. It's hidden. The amount of space it takes up is the tiny tab at the top of the inspector that says ProCh. This is something like 10 pixels high, max, and not much wider.

And I don't find a marker on a track that makes you quickly see if it's invoked or not.

That's in the console view. I agree that it would be a good addition to the track view as well.

Thanks.
In my trial it takes about 150x150 pixels in Inspector where you can see EQ curve and stuff. It also has a heading PROCHANNEL. (Trial X1b)

Pre X1 trackview with effects bin was pretty good. Hope for a return in X2.

With the kind of flow control they always had for midi tracks, if you want more info increase height and fx bin appears.

Perhaps I can learn to use consol view more. I always preferred track view to immediately adjust envelopes etc.

Jonesy

Can I also elect not to select it at all at install time should I not wish to use it?

Like I can choose not to install any other of the included fx?

lfm


Thanks.
In my trial it takes about 150x150 pixels in Inspector where you can see EQ curve and stuff. It also has a heading PROCHANNEL. (Trial X1b)

EQ plot has been there for several versions of Sonar. It's not a new feature of the ProChannel.

Pre X1 trackview with effects bin was pretty good. Hope for a return in X2.

Yeah, I'd like to see more comprehensive track headers again. This isn't anything to do with the ProChannel though.

With the kind of flow control they always had for midi tracks, if you want more info increase height and fx bin appears.

Yeah, as above, I don't think the track header behaviour is quite as good as it was previously.

Perhaps I can learn to use consol view more. I always preferred track view to immediately adjust envelopes etc.

I'm completely in agreement with the argument that people who prefer to work entirely in the track view should be able to do so. My honest recommendation is that console view is enormously useful once in the mixing stage, but there's no reason why anyone should have to use it.

So yeah, the current Track View is short on a couple of things for non-console users.

So... if the bug where it sometimes becomes active gets fixed, will that not be good enough for you?

Brandon Ryan: By virtue of that logic then the Sonitus EQ in Producer from SONAR 3-8.5 should have bothered folks too. It's an effect that doesn't behave like a plugin either. You could extend the argument and say that a panner is the same thing.

Brandon, you disappoint me. I thought if anyone, you could at least see my point about it being a usability issue. And since you brought it up, I never used the built-in Sonitus EQ either. For that matter, I never used the track inspector until forced to in X1 to access the phase button. It didn't fit how I worked with Sonar and I just didn't need it.  It now is a slight slowdown for me.

You also mention logic. Sadly, all the responses to my posts have two basic logical fallacies, including yours. 1: The strawman argument. Someone brings up some point that I didn't say to tear it down. I never mentioned the panner. Of course it would be silly to have that as a binnable, insertable, not-there-by-default-effect. So of course I didn't mention it.  You might not think so, but I'm not that dense. And in other posts, people bring up other things that I never mentioned.

Fallacy 2: The false analogy. This is similar to that, therefore any problems I have with this should apply to that. So because the panner is embedded in the track, I should have a the same issues with it that the embedded PC has? No. They are different. The PC is not the panner, is not the volume slider, is not the anything except what it is: the Pro Channel. It is most similar to the built-in Sonitus eq, as mentioned. But that only strengthens my point since the Sonitus eq could be inserted in a bin, including a clip fx bin. Sometimes I'd like the PC on a clip--it's zero latency after all (even though one of the saturation modes has/had a 4 sample delay on it... haven't checked if that was fixed or not since I just don't use the PC) and easy on the CPU. I could very much find use for it on in individual clips.

I honestly didn't think that Cakewalk would change the behavior of the PC based on my complaint. But I did think it was important to actually bring up the issues I have with it so that they could duly note it. And incidentally, I have brought up these issues with the interaction designers that work here at my office and at least they can see my point.

Perhaps it's because I mainly do video soundtracks (dialog, sfx, music editing rather than production)  these days. The PC could find a very good home on lots of individual clips, but it's limited to whole tracks or busses. I'm apparently not using Sonar in the same way that the majority of the users here. Maybe that's why I run into these issues.  Or maybe I'm just an idiot who can't get with the program.

Edit: to be clear: I don't actually object to it being 'embedded' in and of itself. I also don't object to it being 'integrated' and un-disable-able. I object to its usability in that it is limited to being stuck in the track inspector. Or the console, but I also never use the console. If it could just also behave like a normal plugin all my complaints about it would burn off like the fog they are.

FastBikerBoy


I've been reading this thread for the entertainment value. I haven't seen the prochannel on/off bug as yet but if it's a "problem" that takes half witted amateurs such as myself a long time to notice it's not much of a problem really, is it?

I prefer it embedded mainly for speed when switching from track to track. If it was to be VST'd in the effects bin opening and adjusting will be far more time consuming.

But that's the kind of thinking that keeps companies (CW in this case) from fixing some bugs.   It's not that they don't exist -- it's that some people never run into them based on how they use the software.    But it serves no one to disavow their existence when there's enough evidence that more than one user has run into the bug(s).

Also - as for having the PC there for 'speed', well, that is one argument to be made (I'm in the camp that doesn't want the PC inline), but one could also use BUSSING with one instance in the simplest case.   Takes about 2 clicks ;)

And nice to see you Karl

I haven't used the PC at all in any projects yet.  But due to this very entertaining thread I decided to both check it out and see if I could catch it doing its on/off foolishness.  It's actually pretty decent sounding.  The compressor is certainly very usable.  Haven't given the EQ enough of a work out yet but seems OK.  Saturation is...meh.  Just my initial thoughts.  Didn't once catch it coming on or shutting off in the time I was goofing with it but did find one anomaly.  Once, while all the modules were in the off state, I clicked on the "vintage" button on the eq and the eq module powered up.  I don't think it's supposed to do that.  I reset the module to "pure" and shut it down and then reselected "vintage".  This time the module did not power up.  Still...like some have been claiming here...it didn't take me long to discover some (very minor, yet) wonky behaviour.  It's certainly understandable that no one wants to have an unstable effect(s) in any of their projects and throughout all 12 pages so far I don't know of anyone who's stated that in any way.  Apparently some think that the PC is so wonky it can't be trusted to even exist in X1.  And if the PC WAS randomly turning on or off for MOST folks that might seem a reasonable approach.  I think it's been totally agreed that the PC is buggy and needs to be fixed.  And I, for one, think Cake will do so.  Soon.  But (empirically, I'll admit) it looks like MOST folks either don't have the problem or don't care about it or are willing to work around it...as we all have to do for so many things both Cake and third party related.  Some think the PC should be totally deleteable.  That seems like a pretty extreme view to take about a very useful tool whose default state is off (when functioning properly) and that takes up no resources when off.  Some wish it was separate from X1 altogether...just another plugin in the toolbox.  This is a nice wish.  A great idea, even.  But it ain't gonna happ'n Cap'n.  And Brandon has made it pretty clear that the current implementation of the PC is not slated to change...torches and pitchforks and anguished cries notwithstanding.  So...until Cake fixes the bugs...I'd suggest everyone just sit back, relax and keep an eagle eye on your PC channels like Mike suggests.  Or carry on  with this redundant exercise.  Like they say at Mickey Ds...I'm lovin it!

John T


You seem to be complaining about even being offered sauce, to borrow your analogy.

Not at all.

But thanks for asking.

+1 Jonbouy.


My Pro Channel Summary --- the story of integrated user interface.

Pluses:

• Convenient for only people who like to use it.

Minuses:

• Can't be used in other apps.
• Most likely took more time*** to implement and test then normal VST.
• Doesn't fit on small resolution screens. (Scroll bars anyone?)
• Affects all users regardless of whether you want to use it or not. (Critical since it has had a number bugs since release).
• Will continue to affect all users with every subsequent X1 updates. (Even more critical since it's built-in, changes in Sonar can break PC and visa versa).
• Because of last point, new features/fixes will theoretically take longer to implement and to test. (Eg Color customization would need to include all PC GUI areas too).
• Stepping stone to even more integrated GUI's thus more of the above.

*** A stand alone VST can be tested regardless of Sonar.
E.g. Programmer(s) can code/compile without the need of the much larger main app.
E.g. A VST can tested with Cubase if the QA dept wanted to be funny.


PS - hey XXXXX, this is from wikipedia. Sound familiar?

"...a troll is someone who posts inflammatory extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum..."

EDIT: Name removed - they know who they are...

Minuses:

• Can't be used in other apps.

True, but this is also true of several of the other bundled effects.

• Most likely took more time*** to implement and test then normal VST.

None of us have any idea how long these things do or don't take to implement. This is meaningless speculation.

• Doesn't fit on small resolution screens. (Scroll bars anyone?)

Yeah, that's a flaw.

• Affects all users regardless of whether you want to use it or not. (Critical since it has had a number bugs since release).

Hmm. Seems to have one bug of which you could say this.

• Will continue to affect all users with every subsequent X1 updates. (Even more critical since it's built-in, changes in Sonar can break PC and visa versa).

This is true of any feature.

• Because of last point, new features/fixes will theoretically take longer to implement and to test. (Eg Color customization would need to include all PC GUI areas too).

You have no idea whether this makes it harder or easier to fix issues. This is meaningless speculation.

• Stepping stone to even more integrated GUI's thus more of the above.

You have no idea whether this is the case or not.

*** A stand alone VST can be tested regardless of Sonar.
E.g. Programmer(s) can code/compile without the need of the much larger main app.

If you want to know whether it works in Sonar, you need to test it in Sonar. So this is irrelevant.

So the behaviour I witnessed with the PC wasn't "buggy" at all...just purposefully convoluted.  I'm still gonna keep my eyes peeled for that on/off thingy.  And I'm gonna use the ol PC in some things and give it a workout.  Thanks for the clarification John, ol pal.

n0rd

John T

Minuses:

• Can't be used in other apps.

True, but this is also true of several of the other bundled effects.

Portability is one of the reasons for VSTs! Otherwise every app would have their own standard and the user would lose.

I don't disagree. However, it is still true of several of the other bundled effects. Vintage Channel and Boost 11 off the top of my head, and I know there are more.

• Most likely took more time*** to implement and test then normal VST.

None of us have any idea how long these things do or don't take to implement. This is meaningless speculation.

Hahaha, some people do, so it's not meaningless.

This is a non-reply. Let me rephrase. You have no idea how long it took to implement.

• Affects all users regardless of whether you want to use it or not. (Critical since it has had a number bugs since release).

Hmm. Seems to have one bug of which you could say this.

One bug since release? Incorrect... Use forum search and see. (For the exact number you'd have to ask Cake).

No, one bug which "affects all users regardless of whether you want to use it".

• Will continue to affect all users with every subsequent X1 updates. (Even more critical since it's built-in, changes in Sonar can break PC and visa versa).

This is true of any feature.

Not true. A VSTs from 8.5 (or from 3rd party) could have gone zero changes and have zero effect moving onto X1 and any other updates. Do you think all the 3rd party VST makers needed to make changes when X1 was released?

How a third party VST qualifies as a feature of Sonar is not something I understand.

• Because of last point, new features/fixes will theoretically take longer to implement and to test. (Eg Color customization would need to include all PC GUI areas too).

You have no idea whether this makes it harder or easier to fix issues. This is meaningless speculation.

Please, don't be silly and claim to have the ability to read my mind. You may have "no idea" doesn't mean nobody knows...

If you had any idea, you wouldn't be using words like "most likely" and "theoretically". If we're concerned about not being silly, let's not waste time with this.

• Stepping stone to even more integrated GUI's thus more of the above.

You have no idea whether this is the case or not.

I'll give you that one. You'll have to ask Cake to be sure - doubt they'll say.
But it would certainly suck if all the effects in Sonar could no longer be used in other apps because of hard coded GUIs.

Indeed, it would. But I'm personally not terribly inclined to sit here worrying about stuff that's not yet happening and there's no indication of it happening in the future. It would suck if the keyboard I'm typing at suddenly exploded too.

*** A stand alone VST can be tested regardless of Sonar.
E.g. Programmer(s) can code/compile without the need of the much larger main app.

If you want to know whether it works in Sonar, you need to test it in Sonar. So this is irrelevant.

Irrelevant? Makes development & testing *so* much easier when you're not coupled to another app in development.

Now this is just plain nuts. If you're not testing something in the way it is to be used, you aren't testing it.

Imagine the uproar if a plug in had a bug, and Brandon came on said "well, it worked okay in Ableton, we thought it'd be fine".

Who?