Helpful ReplyWhy was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?

Page: << < ..1112131415.. > >> Showing page 15 of 17
Author
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 10:25:40 (permalink)
"Yesterday Brandon suggested I could try to delete the .dll's for the Pro Channel.

I found 4 .dll's. A bus, comp, eq, and sat .dll all in the 'C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal' folder. I didn't delete them, but I made a backup folder and moved them.

I started a new project 44.1/32, so far 4 full length audio tracks (iow not 10 second clips), and Session Drummer 3. I haven't had a single glitch except for the tool bar disappearing, which is a pita, but is easily fixed by min/max X1.

The whole bus thing didn't make sense to me until I saw there is a PCS-BusCM.dll. I would think there would have to be a separate bus every time one of the modules of the PC is used. If it was on a single bus, it would just be an FX send and effect all the tracks. So if I'm thinking correctly on this, there is potentially 3 virtual buses per track being created if you use the PC Comp/EQ/Sat. They would have to do it this way rather than tie it to the FX Bin because if you would bypass the FX Bin the PC would also be bypassed.

Another thing I noticed, when I moved the .dll's, the PC graphics still showed up and I could adjust all the knobs and turn all the modules on and off. I would get an error saying the VST didn't load, but appearance wise, everything was still working normally. Which means that the interface and graphics are not part of the .dll's. Therefor the PC modules turning on/off by themselves could have nothing to do with the actual VST .dll's for it. Also, I should get a pop up with an error now when they turn on/off by themselves.

For those of you having troubles with the PC ... it can be disabled but in a roundabout way. Just go to 'C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal' and make another sub folder and move the 4 PC .dll's there.

Hope this helps.

Bub "




Yes Bub that is what I have been saying about the buses.

Noel and many other Cakewalk people have mentioned the old extra bus, and since X1s release, the new extra bus, many times.

I know you didn't demand that I proove this... but this seems like a good time to explain why I did not respond to others' demanding requests of proof of something that I feel can be common knowledge to anyone who has an interest in SONAR.

Thank you for investigating the effects of removing the .dlls


best regards,
mike



post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/07/08 10:27:35


BEATZM1D10T
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 285
  • Joined: 2009/05/22 12:43:50
  • Location: Mid-West
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 11:39:57 (permalink)
Bub


mike_mccue

The Pro Channel is on a bus. Its very own bus.

All I am pointing out is that I ought to be able to delete stuff off that bus.

That way... if you really like using ProChannel on that bus... do it!!!!!! and enjoy!!!!!!

And, if you don't want ProChannel on that bus... delete it.

It's like getting a free bus that is already there.

Remember a few versions back when the other hidden bus suddenly added gain to your track?

That is not the bus I'm speaking of... I am speaking of the bus that ProChannel is on.

If you are using ProChannel, you are already using that bus.

I think I am too...

very best,
mike
Yesterday Brandon suggested I could try to delete the .dll's for the Pro Channel.

I found 4 .dll's. A bus, comp, eq, and sat .dll all in the 'C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal' folder. I didn't delete them, but I made a backup folder and moved them.

I started a new project 44.1/32, so far 4 full length audio tracks (iow not 10 second clips), and Session Drummer 3. I haven't had a single glitch except for the tool bar disappearing, which is a pita, but is easily fixed by min/max X1.

The whole bus thing didn't make sense to me until I saw there is a PCS-BusCM.dll. I would think there would have to be a separate bus every time one of the modules of the PC is used. If it was on a single bus, it would just be an FX send and effect all the tracks. So if I'm thinking correctly on this, there is potentially 3 virtual buses per track being created if you use the PC Comp/EQ/Sat. They would have to do it this way rather than tie it to the FX Bin because if you would bypass the FX Bin the PC would also be bypassed.

Another thing I noticed, when I moved the .dll's, the PC graphics still showed up and I could adjust all the knobs and turn all the modules on and off. I would get an error saying the VST didn't load, but appearance wise, everything was still working normally. Which means that the interface and graphics are not part of the .dll's. Therefor the PC modules turning on/off by themselves could have nothing to do with the actual VST .dll's for it. Also, I should get a pop up with an error now when they turn on/off by themselves.

For those of you having troubles with the PC ... it can be disabled but in a roundabout way. Just go to 'C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal' and make another sub folder and move the 4 PC .dll's there.

Hope this helps.

Bub


uhhhhhhhh.

If you put your mouse over PCS-BusCM.dll the Windows tool tip says "PC4K Bus Compressor Dynamic Link Library".

What was that specific module designed after? Oh, yeah! The SSL 4000 series bus compressor....

That really isn't any indicator or proof of your guys magical hidden buses.
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 11:41:50 (permalink)
Aha... it is just a naming coincidence.

Good job on investigating further.

best,
mike
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/07/08 11:42:52


Bub
Max Output Level: -3.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7196
  • Joined: 2010/10/25 10:22:13
  • Location: Sneaking up behind you!
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:18:35 (permalink)
BEATZM1D10T


Bub


mike_mccue

The Pro Channel is on a bus. Its very own bus.

All I am pointing out is that I ought to be able to delete stuff off that bus.

That way... if you really like using ProChannel on that bus... do it!!!!!! and enjoy!!!!!!

And, if you don't want ProChannel on that bus... delete it.

It's like getting a free bus that is already there.

Remember a few versions back when the other hidden bus suddenly added gain to your track?

That is not the bus I'm speaking of... I am speaking of the bus that ProChannel is on.

If you are using ProChannel, you are already using that bus.

I think I am too...

very best,
mike
Yesterday Brandon suggested I could try to delete the .dll's for the Pro Channel.

I found 4 .dll's. A bus, comp, eq, and sat .dll all in the 'C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal' folder. I didn't delete them, but I made a backup folder and moved them.

I started a new project 44.1/32, so far 4 full length audio tracks (iow not 10 second clips), and Session Drummer 3. I haven't had a single glitch except for the tool bar disappearing, which is a pita, but is easily fixed by min/max X1.

The whole bus thing didn't make sense to me until I saw there is a PCS-BusCM.dll. I would think there would have to be a separate bus every time one of the modules of the PC is used. If it was on a single bus, it would just be an FX send and effect all the tracks. So if I'm thinking correctly on this, there is potentially 3 virtual buses per track being created if you use the PC Comp/EQ/Sat. They would have to do it this way rather than tie it to the FX Bin because if you would bypass the FX Bin the PC would also be bypassed.

Another thing I noticed, when I moved the .dll's, the PC graphics still showed up and I could adjust all the knobs and turn all the modules on and off. I would get an error saying the VST didn't load, but appearance wise, everything was still working normally. Which means that the interface and graphics are not part of the .dll's. Therefor the PC modules turning on/off by themselves could have nothing to do with the actual VST .dll's for it. Also, I should get a pop up with an error now when they turn on/off by themselves.

For those of you having troubles with the PC ... it can be disabled but in a roundabout way. Just go to 'C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal' and make another sub folder and move the 4 PC .dll's there.

Hope this helps.

Bub


uhhhhhhhh.

If you put your mouse over PCS-BusCM.dll the Windows tool tip says "PC4K Bus Compressor Dynamic Link Library".

What was that specific module designed after? Oh, yeah! The SSL 4000 series bus compressor....

That really isn't any indicator or proof of your guys magical hidden buses.
Excellent find!

Now if you would only put that much effort in to trying to help your fellow forum members rather than being a wisenhimer. I've been spending a lot of time trying to come up with a temporary fix for this crap with no help from Cakewalk ...

And it doesn't remove the fact that there are hidden buses. If you spent as much time looking for that answer as you do being a smartass, you'd know the answer already.

Thanks!

Bub

"I pulled the head off Elvis, filled Fred up to his pelvis, yaba daba do, the King is gone, and so are you."
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:25:40 (permalink)
Bub

...being a wisenhimer.

...being a smartass,


Bub
Easy now (and which is it)
    I've been spending a lot of time trying to come up with a temporary fix for this crap with no help from Cakewalk ...
No help?


"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:29:48 (permalink)
FWIW - i spent quite a bit over the last couple nights trying to get a ProChannel to come on by itself and couldn't make it happen. I tried staring at it, ignoring it...nothing.

Not saying it doesn't happen but I can't get it to happen. I know it is still being investigated.

Is anyone other than Bub having this "turning on at random" problem"?

"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
Bub
Max Output Level: -3.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7196
  • Joined: 2010/10/25 10:22:13
  • Location: Sneaking up behind you!
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:31:32 (permalink)
Ok, moving on ...

I just had the VST error's pop up multiple times with the .dll's removed.

I inserted a synth template for Session Drummer 3's Brush Kit and I get ...

5 CakeSM.dll (Tube Saturation) and 5 BusCM.dll (4K Compressor) errors.

I did this with the .dll's in place also and I got no errors but the Tube Sat and 4k Comp were not activated on the tracks and buses that the template created so I'm not sure why those two throw error's without the .dll's.

Just thought I'd pass it along.

Thanks.

PS. Thanks to BEATZM1D10T for figuring out what each .dll was actually for.



"I pulled the head off Elvis, filled Fred up to his pelvis, yaba daba do, the King is gone, and so are you."
Bub
Max Output Level: -3.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7196
  • Joined: 2010/10/25 10:22:13
  • Location: Sneaking up behind you!
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:42:06 (permalink)
Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk]
         No help?

My apologies. I was caught up in the moment. Doing 10 things at once. :)

FWIW - i spent quite a bit over the last couple nights trying to get a ProChannel to come on by itself and couldn't make it happen. I tried staring at it, ignoring it...nothing.

Not saying it doesn't happen but I can't get it to happen. I know it is still being investigated.

Is anyone other than Bub having this "turning on at random" problem"?
Thanks for spending the time on it Brandon.

Can you please clarify this question that keeps coming up about the hidden bus. If I'm mistaken about what I thought I read I'll certainly apologize for spreading misinformation.

Thanks,

Bub


"I pulled the head off Elvis, filled Fred up to his pelvis, yaba daba do, the King is gone, and so are you."
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:49:25 (permalink)
Bub


Can you please clarify this question that keeps coming up about the hidden bus. If I'm mistaken about what I thought I read I'll certainly apologize for spreading misinformation.

Thanks,

Bub

I know of no hidden buses in SONAR related to the ProChannel (or otherwise). The ProChannel is an effects section built in to every channel.


"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:51:41 (permalink)
Thanks Brandon,

If you are curious, You might ask Noel why he has explained it that way.

:-)

best regards,
mike


BEATZM1D10T
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 285
  • Joined: 2009/05/22 12:43:50
  • Location: Mid-West
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:55:19 (permalink)
Bub


BEATZM1D10T


Bub


mike_mccue

The Pro Channel is on a bus. Its very own bus.

All I am pointing out is that I ought to be able to delete stuff off that bus.

That way... if you really like using ProChannel on that bus... do it!!!!!! and enjoy!!!!!!

And, if you don't want ProChannel on that bus... delete it.

It's like getting a free bus that is already there.

Remember a few versions back when the other hidden bus suddenly added gain to your track?

That is not the bus I'm speaking of... I am speaking of the bus that ProChannel is on.

If you are using ProChannel, you are already using that bus.

I think I am too...

very best,
mike
Yesterday Brandon suggested I could try to delete the .dll's for the Pro Channel.

I found 4 .dll's. A bus, comp, eq, and sat .dll all in the 'C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal' folder. I didn't delete them, but I made a backup folder and moved them.

I started a new project 44.1/32, so far 4 full length audio tracks (iow not 10 second clips), and Session Drummer 3. I haven't had a single glitch except for the tool bar disappearing, which is a pita, but is easily fixed by min/max X1.

The whole bus thing didn't make sense to me until I saw there is a PCS-BusCM.dll. I would think there would have to be a separate bus every time one of the modules of the PC is used. If it was on a single bus, it would just be an FX send and effect all the tracks. So if I'm thinking correctly on this, there is potentially 3 virtual buses per track being created if you use the PC Comp/EQ/Sat. They would have to do it this way rather than tie it to the FX Bin because if you would bypass the FX Bin the PC would also be bypassed.

Another thing I noticed, when I moved the .dll's, the PC graphics still showed up and I could adjust all the knobs and turn all the modules on and off. I would get an error saying the VST didn't load, but appearance wise, everything was still working normally. Which means that the interface and graphics are not part of the .dll's. Therefor the PC modules turning on/off by themselves could have nothing to do with the actual VST .dll's for it. Also, I should get a pop up with an error now when they turn on/off by themselves.

For those of you having troubles with the PC ... it can be disabled but in a roundabout way. Just go to 'C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal' and make another sub folder and move the 4 PC .dll's there.

Hope this helps.

Bub


uhhhhhhhh.

If you put your mouse over PCS-BusCM.dll the Windows tool tip says "PC4K Bus Compressor Dynamic Link Library".

What was that specific module designed after? Oh, yeah! The SSL 4000 series bus compressor....

That really isn't any indicator or proof of your guys magical hidden buses.
Excellent find!

Now if you would only put that much effort in to trying to help your fellow forum members rather than being a wisenhimer. I've been spending a lot of time trying to come up with a temporary fix for this crap with no help from Cakewalk ...

And it doesn't remove the fact that there are hidden buses. If you spent as much time looking for that answer as you do being a smartass, you'd know the answer already.

Thanks!

Bub

Thanks guys but, I don't really need props for that find. It didn't take that much effort. Only about a minute.

I don't have the luxury of trolling the forums nearly as much as the rest of you guys. Can you please cite the fact about the hidden buses with a white paper or a post from a Cakebaker? I've looked and can't find anything besides user opinions. Help please?

IMHO, it seems like PC is just an extra FX bin. It only makes sense because in the 'off' state it wont add any CPU overhead. Just like any empty FX bin. On the other hand buses, even empty ones, add up pretty quickly.
Bub
Max Output Level: -3.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7196
  • Joined: 2010/10/25 10:22:13
  • Location: Sneaking up behind you!
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:57:13 (permalink)
Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]

Bub


Can you please clarify this question that keeps coming up about the hidden bus. If I'm mistaken about what I thought I read I'll certainly apologize for spreading misinformation.

Thanks,

Bub

I know of no hidden buses in SONAR related to the ProChannel (or otherwise). The ProChannel is an effects section built in to every channel.
There you have it kiddies. I was wrong. My apologies to everyone who's feathers were ruffled. I would have bet the farm I read that it was in a past thread here ... but I must be mistaken.

As for your question about has anyone else seen the PC turn off/on ... yes. Here's a thread with some others confirming it.


"I pulled the head off Elvis, filled Fred up to his pelvis, yaba daba do, the King is gone, and so are you."
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 12:58:35 (permalink)
From what I understand - a bus in SONAR is just a destination for Audio. It seems like a pretty simple entity without any real special properties. I imagine it could be that the FX bin is also a "Bus" of sorts (in the strictest sense of SONAR's internal routing).

But in what we think of as a bus - from a mixing standpoint - it's not a bus. So I guess I'm saying...does it really matter whether it's a hidden bus or not? What if it was a hidden "bus"?

"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:01:04 (permalink)
Bub


Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]

Bub


Can you please clarify this question that keeps coming up about the hidden bus. If I'm mistaken about what I thought I read I'll certainly apologize for spreading misinformation.

Thanks,

Bub

I know of no hidden buses in SONAR related to the ProChannel (or otherwise). The ProChannel is an effects section built in to every channel.
There you have it kiddies. I was wrong. My apologies to everyone who's feathers were ruffled. I would have bet the farm I read that it was in a past thread here ... but I must be mistaken.

As for your question about has anyone else seen the PC turn off/on ... yes. Here's a thread with some others confirming it.


Not necessarily. It very well could be a bus as Mike says that Noel said it was. I've just never heard it referred to in that way all through the development of the feature and I have no reason to believe that's what it is. But I also know what a sort-of mundane thing a bus is in SONAR. It's just a destination for multiple streams of audio - nothing magical or sinister.

(Maybe a reference to the quote form Noel would help?)
post edited by Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk] - 2011/07/08 13:05:42

"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:04:39 (permalink)
Bub



As for your question about has anyone else seen the PC turn off/on ... yes. Here's a thread with some others confirming it.

I read that thread (and looked again just now) and couldn't find anyone else that said the ProChannel randomly turns on. I saw some say that previously enabled PC's were unresponsive, but not that it turns itself on.


"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:05:37 (permalink)



http://forum.cakewalk.com...mpage=1&print=true

Noel B says:

"In fact in SONAR's mix engine, internally everything routes through a bus, including output from track's and synths, although these buses are not user visible."




I think the preoccupation with where I get the notion of the term "bus" is nothing but a distraction from the primary topic.

What's so bad about ending up with 2 efx bins?

And why can't Cakewalk help develop a consortium for a unified hardware controller layout for a channel strip so that many VSTs could be "quick mapped" (a term I just made up) It would be nifty... almost like that TDM stuff UAD just announced.


all the best,
mike


  





Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:09:14 (permalink)
mike_mccue


http://forum.cakewalk.com...mpage=1&print=true

Noel B says:

"In fact in SONAR's mix engine, internally everything routes through a bus, including output from track's and synths, although these buses are not user visible."




I think the preoccupation with where I get the notion of the term "bus" is nothing but a distraction from the primary topic.

What's so bad about ending up with 2 efx bins?

And why can't Cakewalk help develop a consortium for a unified hardware controller layout for a channel strip so that many VSTs could be "quick mapped" (a term I just made up) It would be nifty... almost like that TDM stuff UAD just announced.


all the best,
mike


Yes right I agree. This is what I referring to. Buses are used in very mundane and not what we would think of as traditional busing in SONAR. And yes I totally agree that it is beside the point and doesn't really speak to or relate to the actual subject so much.

I'm all for the unified hardware controller layout and "quick mapping".




"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:09:24 (permalink)
Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]

Bub



As for your question about has anyone else seen the PC turn off/on ... yes. Here's a thread with some others confirming it.

I read that thread (and looked again just now) and couldn't find anyone else that said the ProChannel randomly turns on. I saw some say that previously enabled PC's were unresponsive, but not that it turns itself on.


I never went beyond the first 2 hotfixes... I get all of BUb's symptoms... and I filed a report right off the bat.

I believe that I may have even gotten an acknowledgement of confirmation and a optimistic prognosis... but as you recall the stuff was being discovered so fast and furious that I really don't recall which when where with all the bugs.


Good Luck.


best regards,
mike






BEATZM1D10T
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 285
  • Joined: 2009/05/22 12:43:50
  • Location: Mid-West
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:11:33 (permalink)
mike_mccue


http://forum.cakewalk.com...mpage=1&print=true

Noel B says:

"In fact in SONAR's mix engine, internally everything routes through a bus, including output from track's and synths, although these buses are not user visible."




I think the preoccupation with where I get the notion of the term "bus" is nothing but a distraction from the primary topic.

What's so bad about ending up with 2 efx bins?

And why can't Cakewalk help develop a consortium for a unified hardware controller layout for a channel strip so that many VSTs could be "quick mapped" (a term I just made up) It would be nifty... almost like that TDM stuff UAD just announced.


all the best,
mike


 
*scratches head*

So, you guys were using a 4 year old post to try and prove a point about a feature added 7 months ago?
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:12:11 (permalink)
Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]

mike_mccue


http://forum.cakewalk.com...mpage=1&print=true

Noel B says:

"In fact in SONAR's mix engine, internally everything routes through a bus, including output from track's and synths, although these buses are not user visible."




I think the preoccupation with where I get the notion of the term "bus" is nothing but a distraction from the primary topic.

What's so bad about ending up with 2 efx bins?

And why can't Cakewalk help develop a consortium for a unified hardware controller layout for a channel strip so that many VSTs could be "quick mapped" (a term I just made up) It would be nifty... almost like that TDM stuff UAD just announced.


all the best,
mike


Yes right I agree. This is what I referring to. Buses are used in very mundane and not what we would think of as traditional busing in SONAR. And yes I totally agree that it is beside the point and doesn't really speak to or relate to the actual subject so much.

I'm all for the unified hardware controller layout and "quick mapping".


Well, 2 years ago one of those behind the scense busses was spiking our gain levels... and we couldn't get at it. :-)

Have, I mentioned that you are "the best" lately?

Brandon, you're the best!!!

Thanks for putting up with me.


best regards,
mike




Bub
Max Output Level: -3.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7196
  • Joined: 2010/10/25 10:22:13
  • Location: Sneaking up behind you!
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:24:00 (permalink)
My head hurts from all of this. LOL! :)

@ Mike, thanks for posting the quote from Noel. Now I know I'm not losing my mind. :)

@ Brandon ... thanks for your help, it is greatly appreciated even though it may not seem that way at times.

"I pulled the head off Elvis, filled Fred up to his pelvis, yaba daba do, the King is gone, and so are you."
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:37:27 (permalink)
Your Welcome Bub,

I was hoping to postpone the expected insults from BeatzM1D10T for as long as I could.


best regards,
mike


Brandon Ryan [Roland]
Max Output Level: -40.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 3458
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 03:29:12
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 13:52:57 (permalink)
mike_mccue




Well, 2 years ago one of those behind the scense busses was spiking our gain levels... and we couldn't get at it. :-)

HAha - good point.



"The sky above the port was the color of television, tuned to a dead channel." WG

SONAR Platinum | VS-700 | A-800 PRO | PCAL i7 with SSD running Windows 8 x64 | Samsung 27" LCD @ 1920x1080 | Blue Sky monitors with BMC | All kinds of other stuff
BEATZM1D10T
Max Output Level: -85 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 285
  • Joined: 2009/05/22 12:43:50
  • Location: Mid-West
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 15:24:18 (permalink)
mike_mccue


Your Welcome Bub,

I was hoping to postpone the expected insults from BeatzM1D10T for as long as I could.


best regards,
mike

Much of this board is just silly conjecture with no real evidence or reason. I am sorry when I call a spade a spade. I will admit to bringing a healthy sarcasm to the discussion but, last I checked, I was the one called a 'smartass' and 'wisenhimer'. I don't think you could ever find a direct insult from me.

I'm truly flattered that you're thinking of me though.
Bub
Max Output Level: -3.5 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 7196
  • Joined: 2010/10/25 10:22:13
  • Location: Sneaking up behind you!
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 17:24:59 (permalink)
BEATZM1D10T

Much of this board is just silly conjecture with no real evidence or reason.
I've provided multiple video's documenting the problems I'm having with Pro Channel and the Tool Bar, Mike gave you a link proving the hidden bus ... how much more evidence do you need? Sheesh!
I am sorry when I call a spade a spade.
I'm not. Wisenhimer/Smart*** was an accurate description ...
I will admit to bringing a healthy sarcasm (*) to the discussion but, last I checked, I was the one called a 'smartass' and 'wisenhimer'.
Hey, a spade is a spade right?
I don't think you could ever find a direct insult from me.
Right ... that's why it's called sarcasm (*) ... it's an indirect insult. Well, calling people trolls was kind of a direct insult.

It's not a big deal, you said some stuff, I said some stuff, it happens.

In case anyone is interested ... X1's been smokin' along all day since disabling PC. Hope some of this gets addressed in X1C or at least before X2.



"I pulled the head off Elvis, filled Fred up to his pelvis, yaba daba do, the King is gone, and so are you."
stevec
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 11546
  • Joined: 2003/11/04 15:05:54
  • Location: Parkesburg, PA
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/08 17:55:38 (permalink)
X1's been smokin' along all day since disabling PC

 
Good to see you're moving along with X1 despite how you got there.   X1 is pretty nice when it's working as expected, huh?
 
 

SteveC
https://soundcloud.com/steve-cocchi
http://www.soundclick.com/bands/pagemusic.cfm?bandID=39163
 
SONAR Platinum x64, Intel Q9300 (2.5Ghz), Asus P5N-D, Win7 x64 SP1, 8GB RAM, 1TB internal + ESATA + USB Backup HDDs, ATI Radeon HD5450 1GB RAM + dual ViewSonic VA2431wm Monitors;
Focusrite 18i6 (ASIO);
Komplete 9, Melodyne Studio 4, Ozone 7 Advanced, Rapture Pro, GPO5, Valhalla Plate, MJUC comp, MDynamic EQ, lots of other freebie VST plugins, synths and Kontakt libraries
 
mudgel
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 12010
  • Joined: 2004/08/13 00:56:05
  • Location: Linton Victoria (Near Ballarat)
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/09 06:30:47 (permalink)
The only thing I remember reading about buses at a deep level is that internally SONAR does't distinguish between tracks and busses.

As for the ProChannel dll's The issue of what happens when the dlls aren't present was discussed months ago.

A problem I had early on with ProChannel was that because of a faulty installation I didn't have the path specified in the Plugin manager meaning that I had a full PC GUi with lights and all but couldn't get it to process any audio. No error messages generated to alert me to any problems as you get when the scan path is present and the dlls arent.

I wonder if the graphics for the PC are in the ttsres90.dll file that has been the subject of much alteration through SonarMods.

Mike V. (MUDGEL)

STUDIO: Win 10 Pro x64, SPlat & CbB x64,
PC: ASUS Z370-A, INTEL i7 8700k, 32GIG DDR4 2400, OC 4.7Ghz.
Storage: 7 TB SATA III, 750GiG SSD & Samsung 500 Gig 960 EVO NVMe M.2.
Monitors: Adam A7X, JBL 10” Sub.
Audio I/O & DSP Server: DIGIGRID IOS & IOX.
Screen: Raven MTi + 43" HD 4K TV Monitor.
Keyboard Controller: Native Instruments Komplete Kontrol S88.
The Maillard Reaction
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 31918
  • Joined: 2004/07/09 20:02:20
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/09 09:30:06 (permalink)
Good points, if the guys are making the tweaks in that file then it seems like that's where the graphics will be.

best regards,
mike



Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 14070
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/09 19:38:15 (permalink)
SCorey


Regarding Pro Channel: It has a fatal flaw for how I work. In the track view (I never use the console view), its UI is displayed according to which track you have selected.  No other plugin UI in Sonar behaves that way. So if I'm adjusting the ProChannel on one track and I accidentally select another track (happens a lot to me), then the PC's UI is now being displayed for that other track. I have to think about what just happened--why did my PC change?  It's a stutter in working with it. It isn't a workflow improvement.

Essentially for that reason, I don't use the PC. It's whole user interaction and experience is not conducive to how I work.

When I want to "glue" the PC to a particular track, bus, etc. I use the lock option. Most of the time I want the PC to follow what I'm working on, but if not (e.g., want to keep a bus ProChannel visible while adjusting sends on multiple tracks), lock comes in very handy.
Anderton
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
  • Total Posts : 14070
  • Joined: 2003/11/06 14:02:03
  • Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus? 2011/07/09 20:03:04 (permalink)
I should also mention that two of my favorite PC applications are phase shifter and wah emulation. It took a little head-scratching, but I figured out how to nail a vintage E-H Polyphase sound. I have the original, and sometimes used it as a hardware insert, but not being able to do stereo was a hassle.

For the wah you have to give up two channels to implment a single guitar track, but it's worth it. I have a Vox Crybaby here, circa late 60s, which I used as my reality test. Again, being able to get that sound in stereo is really cool.

What I don't like about the PC is that the EQ graph doesn't "stick" to how you set it. I don't like how it auto-ranges, I just want it to sit at 12dB and stay there whenever I open up the program. I'll have to ask Cakewalk if there's some way to do that.
Page: << < ..1112131415.. > >> Showing page 15 of 17
Jump to:
© 2024 APG vNext Commercial Version 5.1