John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 06:17:54
(permalink)
frankandfree
I didn't ask for having PC open for other DAWs, but accessible in the insert slots of a track, so they can be chained as the user likes it, or a PC EQ (or compressor) could be used twice in serial on the same track.
While I don't actually disagree with this point, I think you have to admit we're down to a fairly small issue. The modules within it can be chained in any order, and it can be pre or post the effects bin. So, sure, there are scenarios in which you'll have to use other effects than the ones in the PC to get a given result, like a series of compressors. But in practical terms, there aren't really many day to day use cases it can't cater for. And in any case, if you need to do something more unusual, everything you could need to do that with is in the X1 package. To me, it makes perfect sense. You've got an in-line, super convenient channel strip for bread and butter sound sculpting, and you can go to your plug ins for more esoteric stuff. If your preference is to always use certain other plug-ins, you can still do that. A substantial chunk of this thread is simply people who like complaining grasping for stuff to complain about. PC bugs, sure they need fixing. Compressors and EQs are gimmicks? Laughable. Still looking for this hidden bus, by the way. Must be really well-hidden.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
ProjectM
Max Output Level: -36 dBFS
- Total Posts : 3941
- Joined: 2004/02/10 09:32:12
- Location: Norway
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 06:18:11
(permalink)
I think the PC has its strength in how modest it is. And to me that says a lot. If I want to completely squash something, then I use a compressor that squeezes everything to the floor. If I need to cut out the 1KHz band of a sound, I use an EQ that can do that. And if I need aggressive distortion I use a distortion plug in or guitar amp VST. The PC is great for adjusting a track into place and if I'm not using it on a channel then I simply ignore it. What I like about the implementation of it is that I don't have to use it or see it on tracks where I don't want it to do anything. Having the Pro Channel on every track makes it easy and convenient way to adjust in a mix. And the FX-Bin is still there if I need to use something else. If I don't use the PC on a track then I don't mind that it turns the EQ on and off. As long as the knobs are in its default position then it doesn't do anything. I have noticed this behavior on two occasions. Once there was an orphaned envelope that switched it on and off. I deleted that and its behavior was normal. The other time I didn't look very hard into it so I made sure the EQ was flat and used something else. Never looked at PC for that channel again and it sounds great. I won’t analyze whether it’s a gimmick or anything and I seriously don’t care. Of course Cakewalk put it in there to sell Sonar. Why else would they add anything to the software? This at least is beneficial to me. Other features haven’t always been useful to me so I ignore them. A cool thing about Sonar is that the software never forces me to use anything. I can choose to use these features or not. Either way, I’m happy with PC and how it’s work. Sometimes I don’t need it and that’s fine too. Just a couple of cents 
(Sonar Platinum - Win10 x64) - iMac and 13" MacBook - Logic Pro X ++ - UA Apollo Twin DUO - NI Maschine MKII - NI Komplete Kontrol S61 - Novation Nocturne - KRK Rokit 6 SoundcloudNegative Vibe Records
|
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?
2011/07/04 06:27:23
(permalink)
What happens if you remove the ProChannel scan Path from the VST Plugin manager's paths?
Any one know or experimented to find out.
I do know what happens I'm just wandering how widely known the result is.
default location for the ProChannel dlls
C:\Program Files\Cakewalk\Shared Utilities\Internal
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.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 06:29:47
(permalink)
Not tried it myself, but I'll happily bet a shiny penny on "if you remove integrated components of an application, it stops working properly".
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
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?
2011/07/04 06:38:53
(permalink)
It just seems strange that for a hardwired component of SONAR Producer only that there is a VST path in the plugin manager. Why not hide it completely?
If you delete the dlls/or change the path so its incorrect you just get a non working GUI of the ProChannel. When you remove dlls of VST's you don't get the graphic elements or any part of the program. just a weird implementation. I don't particularly care, it just seems a weird way to hardwire a component within SONAR.
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.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 06:42:06
(permalink)
Well, there's a monumental non-issue. Somebody call the cops.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
trimph1
Max Output Level: -12 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6348
- Joined: 2010/09/07 19:20:06
- Location: London ON
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 07:01:06
(permalink)
Well, it is kind of funny how that happens. Whether one likes it or not is another matter...
The space you have will always be exceeded in direct proportion to the amount of stuff you have...Thornton's Postulate. Bushpianos
|
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?
2011/07/04 09:16:39
(permalink)
I am still sort of amazed that people perceive that opening a project infested with Pro Channel is some how faster than opening a project that is based on a template with a EQ and Compressor preloaded in every FX bin. That's like comparing fast and fast... except that one solution has been proven to work well and has been 100% solid for a dozen or more years while the new method hasn't proven to work well. The people not using ProChannel know it has problems and the people enjoying the use of it aren't paying any attention... as I suggested earlier in this thread... I doubt someone who prioritizes the quick access to efx has time to sit around and stare at the efx to see if they are actually on and working all the time. It doesn't matter if you do care... you can't actually observe the situation on each track at the same time... so it may not be worth bothering to check. If you really like ProChannel, It's probably best to just enjoy it and not even worry if ProChannel is on and working. You may never notice that it is switching on and off automatically in the background. Cakewalk could have preloaded the Normal template with the VX64 or some of the other goober ware and everyone could have said stuff like... "it's way quicker now... it really suits my creativity to just pop open a efx and make a little tweak.". That solution would have been clean, efficient, and elegant. And, it would have come with the inherent option to opt out and run any template one prefers. best regards, mike
post edited by mike_mccue - 2011/07/04 09:20:50
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 09:25:14
(permalink)
> I am still sort of amazed that people perceive that opening a project infested with Pro Channel is some how faster than opening a project that is based on a template with a EQ and Compressor preloaded in every FX bin.
Has anybody advanced that as an argument?
> you can't actually observe the situation on each track at the same time
Yes you can, there are indicator lights in the strips in the console view.
> Cakewalk could have blah blah blah blah blah
Sure. But they didn't. And I will bet you any amount of money in the world that you banging on about it won't make them change their direction on this.
> And, it would have come with the inherent option to opt out and run any template one prefers.
You can still do that as it is.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
DeveryH
Max Output Level: -75 dBFS
- Total Posts : 780
- Joined: 2004/12/01 21:27:43
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 09:46:56
(permalink)
What's the "hidden bus" the OP mentioned?
|
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?
2011/07/04 09:48:41
(permalink)
John T
> I am still sort of amazed that people perceive that opening a project infested with Pro Channel is some how faster than opening a project that is based on a template with a EQ and Compressor preloaded in every FX bin.
Has anybody advanced that as an argument?
I get the impression you do not actually read the threads that you participate in. Now that you have explained that you are a professional journalist I have elected to leave you to your own reading.
> you can't actually observe the situation on each track at the same time
Yes you can, there are indicator lights in the strips in the console view.
I have the impression that you don't really understand the nature of the problem.
> Cakewalk could have blah blah blah blah blah
Sure. But they didn't. And I will bet you any amount of money in the world that you banging on about it won't make them change their direction on this.
I acknowledge your statement. > And, it would have come with the inherent option to opt out and run any template one prefers.
You can still do that as it is.
I have the impression that you don't really understand the nature of the concern... I do not want a known buggy plugin infesting my project... it's bad form. Happy 4th!!!
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 10:04:08
(permalink)
Nobody wants bugs, of course. But again, the forum whinger overstating the case style of argumentation is what's really going on here.
There's a bug, in which it appears parts of the pro channel sometimes switch on and off unexpectedly. Everyone would like this bug to go away.
In the meantime, we have the question of how prevalent, and how much of a show stopper it is. I'm currently working on four fairly large projects on a daily basis, and I've seen it happen twice. So an annoyance, for sure, but in the scheme of things, well within "s**t happens" territory.
As soon as this bug is fixed, all of your objections become totally irrelevant, down from their current barely relevant status. You do't have to use the thing if you don't want. If you prefer templates of your own, you can do that.
Your hand wavy "you don't understand the problem" is just lame. You say you can't see the state of the prochannel across the project. You can, in the console view. That's a simple factual error on your part.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch 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?
2011/07/04 10:36:19
(permalink)
Apparently you have elected to avoid thinking it through.
From wiki:
"Journalism is the practice of investigation and reporting of events, issues and trends to a broad audience."
If I may, I suggest that you spend some more time on the investigation phase.
Happy 4th!!!
|
n0rd
Max Output Level: -86 dBFS
- Total Posts : 237
- Joined: 2010/11/02 02:18:00
- Location: Down Under (Australia)
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 10:55:14
(permalink)
John T
Nobody wants bugs, of course. But again, the forum whinger overstating the case style of argumentation is what's really going on here.
I disagree. ProChannel clearly is a VST except Cake decided to hard-wire it to the main app. Now it becomes an issue for all users and not just ProChannel users. What if next time a bug causes crashes? Again, it will affect all users.
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 10:59:13
(permalink)
There are plenty of bugs that affect all users. Obviously, they are all undesirable.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 10:59:45
(permalink)
mike_mccue
Apparently you have elected to avoid thinking it through.
From wiki:
"Journalism is the practice of investigation and reporting of events, issues and trends to a broad audience."
If I may, I suggest that you spend some more time on the investigation phase.
Happy 4th!!!
This is such weaksauce.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
Bristol_Jonesey
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 16775
- Joined: 2007/10/08 15:41:17
- Location: Bristol, UK
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 11:03:24
(permalink)
John T
frankandfree
I didn't ask for having PC open for other DAWs, but accessible in the insert slots of a track, so they can be chained as the user likes it, or a PC EQ (or compressor) could be used twice in serial on the same track.
While I don't actually disagree with this point, I think you have to admit we're down to a fairly small issue. The modules within it can be chained in any order, and it can be pre or post the effects bin.
So, sure, there are scenarios in which you'll have to use other effects than the ones in the PC to get a given result, like a series of compressors. But in practical terms, there aren't really many day to day use cases it can't cater for. And in any case, if you need to do something more unusual, everything you could need to do that with is in the X1 package.
To me, it makes perfect sense. You've got an in-line, super convenient channel strip for bread and butter sound sculpting, and you can go to your plug ins for more esoteric stuff. If your preference is to always use certain other plug-ins, you can still do that.
A substantial chunk of this thread is simply people who like complaining grasping for stuff to complain about. PC bugs, sure they need fixing. Compressors and EQs are gimmicks? Laughable.
Still looking for this hidden bus, by the way. Must be really well-hidden.
+1
CbB, Platinum, 64 bit throughoutCustom built i7 3930, 32Gb RAM, 2 x 1Tb Internal HDD, 1 x 1TB system SSD (Win 7), 1 x 500Gb system SSD (Win 10), 2 x 1Tb External HDD's, Dual boot Win 7 & Win 10 64 Bit, Saffire Pro 26, ISA One, Adam P11A,
|
ba_midi
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 14061
- Joined: 2003/11/05 16:58:18
- Location: NYC
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 11:33:24
(permalink)
|
sykodelic
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 612
- Joined: 2011/05/17 15:44:28
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:05:10
(permalink)
The people not using ProChannel know it has problems and the people enjoying the use of it aren't paying any attention...
I'm glad you think you know what I'm paying attention too. Why don't you stick to making comments that are more than you making crap up..........
Asus P8P67 pro, I7 2600K, 8G Kingston Hyperflex, 2 1T WD Caviar Black(sytem,audio), 2T WD Caviar Black(samples), RME Multiface, Roland A500 Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate 64, Sonar X1C, Ableton Live 8, Reason 6, Komplete 7, DCAM Synth Squad, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian
|
sykodelic
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 612
- Joined: 2011/05/17 15:44:28
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:07:30
(permalink)
Asus P8P67 pro, I7 2600K, 8G Kingston Hyperflex, 2 1T WD Caviar Black(sytem,audio), 2T WD Caviar Black(samples), RME Multiface, Roland A500 Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate 64, Sonar X1C, Ableton Live 8, Reason 6, Komplete 7, DCAM Synth Squad, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:08:05
(permalink)
Yeah, that whole "if you don't agree with me then you don't know what you're talking about" style of argument is really out of order.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
sykodelic
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 612
- Joined: 2011/05/17 15:44:28
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:10:46
(permalink)
Yeah I like hearing people with valid arguements but posts like this lack all intelligence and are a waste of time and space.
Asus P8P67 pro, I7 2600K, 8G Kingston Hyperflex, 2 1T WD Caviar Black(sytem,audio), 2T WD Caviar Black(samples), RME Multiface, Roland A500 Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate 64, Sonar X1C, Ableton Live 8, Reason 6, Komplete 7, DCAM Synth Squad, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian
|
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?
2011/07/04 12:21:37
(permalink)
Again, I don't see how anyone could like the fact that a proprietary VST is embedded in to their DAW?
Even if you say 'don't use it', well you know that isn't going to happen. Eventually everyone is going to use this thing staring them in the face on every single track just to save the extra steps of loading an EQ or compressor in to the FX bin, and once you do ... you are locked in to Sonar forever. It's sales/marketing 101.
You guys realize it's too late now right? You can never change your mind now because it's there. You have to like it wether you like it or not.
Pro Channel turning on/off on it's own is a show stopper even if it only happens once every 10 projects ... you know why? Because you have no option to remove it. Did you see the screenshot I posted on page 3 of this thread?? 1 audio track, 1 synth, 1 vst, and not even any audio recorded yet ... and Pro Channel turns the EQ on by itself and the freaking control bar at the top turns gray and removes all the buttons?! WTH? We're 2 patches and 3 hot fixes in and this kind of thing is still happening?
"I pulled the head off Elvis, filled Fred up to his pelvis, yaba daba do, the King is gone, and so are you."
|
bapu
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 86000
- Joined: 2006/11/25 21:23:28
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:33:29
(permalink)
Billy,
Are you back to see if X1c changes color customization everything?
Welcome back my friend.
|
bapu
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 86000
- Joined: 2006/11/25 21:23:28
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:35:09
(permalink)
John T
There are plenty of bugs that affect all users. Obviously, they are all undesirable.
Nuh uh!
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:36:40
(permalink)
Bub
Again, I don't see how anyone could like the fact that a proprietary VST is embedded in to their DAW?
Even if you say 'don't use it', well you know that isn't going to happen. Eventually everyone is going to use this thing staring them in the face on every single track just to save the extra steps of loading an EQ or compressor in to the FX bin, and once you do ... you are locked in to Sonar forever. It's sales/marketing 101.
So you are seriously telling me you find yourself incapable of not using things you don't want to use? The gorgon-like gaze of the marketing occultists at Cakewalk inevitably overcomes your will? What absolute rubbish.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|
sykodelic
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 612
- Joined: 2011/05/17 15:44:28
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:43:48
(permalink)
Bub
Again, I don't see how anyone could like the fact that a proprietary VST is embedded in to their DAW?
Even if you say 'don't use it', well you know that isn't going to happen. Eventually everyone is going to use this thing staring them in the face on every single track just to save the extra steps of loading an EQ or compressor in to the FX bin, and once you do ... you are locked in to Sonar forever. It's sales/marketing 101.
So you are seriously telling me you find yourself incapable of not using things you don't want to use? The gorgon-like gaze of the marketing occultists at Cakewalk inevitably overcomes your will?
What absolute rubbish.
+1... there are a few users here that like to complain about everything. no matter what the post is about they somehow chime in with their dislike of this or that feature. getting pretty old.
Asus P8P67 pro, I7 2600K, 8G Kingston Hyperflex, 2 1T WD Caviar Black(sytem,audio), 2T WD Caviar Black(samples), RME Multiface, Roland A500 Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate 64, Sonar X1C, Ableton Live 8, Reason 6, Komplete 7, DCAM Synth Squad, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian
|
bapu
Max Output Level: 0 dBFS
- Total Posts : 86000
- Joined: 2006/11/25 21:23:28
- Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:48:10
(permalink)
sykodelic
+1... bapu likes to post on just about everything. no matter what the post is about he somehow chimes in. getting pretty old. I know. I know.
|
sykodelic
Max Output Level: -78 dBFS
- Total Posts : 612
- Joined: 2011/05/17 15:44:28
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:49:54
(permalink)
sykodelic +1... bapu likes to post on just about everything. no matter what the post is about he somehow chimes in. getting pretty old. I know. I know. bapu
sykodelic
+1... bapu likes to post on just about everything. no matter what the post is abouthe somehow chimes in. getting pretty old.
I know.
I know.
LOL
Asus P8P67 pro, I7 2600K, 8G Kingston Hyperflex, 2 1T WD Caviar Black(sytem,audio), 2T WD Caviar Black(samples), RME Multiface, Roland A500 Pro, Windows 7 Ultimate 64, Sonar X1C, Ableton Live 8, Reason 6, Komplete 7, DCAM Synth Squad, Omnisphere, Stylus RMX, Trillian
|
John T
Max Output Level: -7.5 dBFS
- Total Posts : 6783
- Joined: 2006/06/12 10:24:39
- Status: offline
Re:Why was it so important to shove Pro Channel into it's own hidden bus?
2011/07/04 12:53:52
(permalink)
Man, I was using that X1 the other day, trying to record some guitars. Suddenly there was a bright light, and I don't really know what happened, but when I came to, I was wearing big baggy shorts, and I'd made a hip-hop track entirely in the Matrix view. I couldn't stop myself.
http://johntatlockaudio.com/Self-build PC // 16GB RAM // i7 3770k @ 3.5 Ghz // Nofan 0dB cooler // ASUS P8-Z77 V Pro motherboard // Intel x-25m SSD System Drive // Seagate RAID Array Audio Drive // Windows 10 64 bit // Sonar Platinum (64 bit) // Sonar VS-700 // M-Audio Keystation Pro 88 // KRK RP-6 Monitors // and a bunch of other stuff
|