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

I'm still scratching my head... wondering why it was so darn important to make it appear that Pro Channel is embedded within SONAR.

I have read Cakewalk representatives refer to it as VST technology. So if it really is just another multi function VST, why was it so vital to have it appear to be "part" of SONAR?

It seems like adding the extra hidden bus and making Pro Channel appear to be proprietary took up so much development resources that Cakewalk didn't have a chance to make sure ProChannel actually works consistently.

It seems, to me, to be a ugly tradeoff. I got a VST (which I didn't really want or need) shoved into Cakewalk on a hidden bus that seems to be causing problems. Problems that most folks haven't even recognized yet. I'm guessing the issue is overlooked because ProChannel is hidden in the inspector pane rather than the FX bin.

Perhaps the same folks who feel it takes too much valuable time to load up a VST, of their choice, in the FXbin don't have any time to actually observe whether ProChannel is on or not... at any given instant. I can imagine that staring at ProChannel all the time to see if it's working (on each and every track) can be a real time waster.

I don't know... I guess I'd like to see ProChannel ripped out of the proprietary hidden bus and made an option in the FXbin just like all my other VSTs.

That way, when ProChannel acts up and gets flaky, I can just delete it from the stack and MAKE IT GO AWAY.

I'd pay good money for that feature.




Does anybody really have a good reason why they needed *maybe-ware* permanently wedged into SONAR rather than floating freely in the FXbin?




best regards,
mike






< this post is under construction >

I haven't noticed PC causing any extra problems not related to PC itself, but as to why? That's easy... It forces you to use X1 if you want to use the plug ins! <sigh>

I don't use ProChannel very often, but having it on each strip certainly does not bother me. It's just another option should I choose to use it.

It would be a problem if it had a habit of turning itself ON without my knowledge, but I haven't encountered that and I don't recall seeing any threads about that (I have seen people complain that it turns itself off). I also don't seem to see any resource loss from Pro Channel when it is not in use and even when it is on it is not power hungry at all.

It would be a problem if it had a habit of turning itself ON without my knowledge,

 
 
There on lies one of the problems it tends to turn itself off but does not let you know.  Bit like that person you know where the lights are on but no one is at home.

dan le


What I would love to see is some indication that one or all of the elements in Pro Channel is/are activated, like some sort of a led light right at the track to let you know that there is something going on.
sincerely.
 

That's there, only it's blue rather than red. It's in the normal channel strip just above the EQ plot, so you can see it in the console or the inspector even when the ProChannel is hidden.

I really like the PC's EQ, and in that sense it replaces the Sonitus EQ that was "imbeded" into every channel.  They just added the comp, which too, is nice, and saturation, which isn't so nice (I prefer to push some real analog hardware to get saturation, or hair, or whatever we are supposed to call it today).

Although I agree w/ Mike that it would be good not to have to opt-out of PC, I can see Cake's rational for including it on every channel.  It replaces the Sonitus EQ, and you have their premiere, in-house comp in one package.  They like to show off thier new toys, just like we do.  And it makes for good marketing.

There were a ton of questions about the Sonitus eq, mostly having to do w/ enabling the 2 extra channels, but that seemed to work itself out.  Hopefully, Cake will get the PC sorted out, too, since it is kinda a pain to float it so I can see/work w/ all its controls.  However, I do tend to use the comp for many tracks, unless I want a cleaner 1176 clamp from Sonitus, or a more colorful (some might say duller) sound w/ Nomads's stuff, or just remember to try Voxengo's, which is as good as anything out there.

@

Notecrusher


I agree w/ the OP. ProChannel is eye candy and a gimmick. Complete waste of development time. Too bad they didn't spend the cycles enhancing the problem-laden star feature from the previous release - the matrix view. Which, like ProChannel, has the same virtue: you can just not use it.

Yeah I agree (though I wouldn't call PC complete gimmick).    But it's just easier to sell pizazz to the public than it is serious features.   Fashion before function these days.

Sigh.

I only seen the PC de-activate when I tried to open projects made in 32 then opened in 64 bit.. 
 I love the idea it being available on every channel in the inspector.. If I wanna use it its there , If not np , dont use it.. Its not like its sucking up memory. I don't see whats the big deal if its a vst or not or callable to be inserted into the efx bin..Also I like to see a delay added into it too streamlining plugins is such a workflow saver for me at least.. The sound of the PC is more than I need, I'm very impressed .. Btw Im one to call it how it is and the PC is by far not a waste, maybe the bugs are making people feel that way , but Im sure when and if all's sorted out the PC will be your most used plugin..Its an EQ, and a good sounding Eq to my ears. 

Steve,

I am with you on this one and also wish we had the option to disengage the function completely if PC is using any resources when not turned on.

Keni


Nice to hear from you billy...

...and I understand your point completely. It's a new world every day...

Funny, I had a long-time PT HD user who's a friend and associate of mine stop by the other day. I was showing him some things I've been doing on a project of his. He hadn't been here in a long time and was very impressed with Sonar's look, feel, and features.... then I showed him X1...

After demonstrating some of the features and "isses" his main comment was that many of these items made it feel/look/operate more like PT! Ha! If you can't beat 'em, emulate 'em!

Keni

Thanks Keni.

Yeah there is a lot of homogenizing going on.  It's a tough market.  People are trying to make a living and I think some of the DAW companies are staking out positions/market segments so to speak.

As I said, they do what they have to do -- just like we all do.

Notecrusher


I agree w/ the OP. ProChannel is eye candy and a gimmick. Complete waste of development time. Too bad they didn't spend the cycles enhancing the problem-laden star feature from the previous release - the matrix view. Which, like ProChannel, has the same virtue: you can just not use it.

You can't use the ProChannel? It's weird, because I use it all the time. I also use the Matrix.

Rimshot


Steve,

I am with you on this one and also wish we had the option to disengage the function completely if PC is using any resources when not turned on.

When you turn the ProChannel off - it's off.

Notecrusher


I agree w/ the OP. ProChannel is eye candy and a gimmick.

How is it a gimmick if it offers handy, great sounding EQ and compression on every channel? (which it does). Maybe you don't have need for that functionality but it by no means makes it a gimmick.

Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]

Notecrusher


I agree w/ the OP. ProChannel is eye candy and a gimmick. Complete waste of development time. Too bad they didn't spend the cycles enhancing the problem-laden star feature from the previous release - the matrix view. Which, like ProChannel, has the same virtue: you can just not use it.

You can't use the ProChannel? It's weird, because I use it all the time. I also use the Matrix.

I meant you can choose not to use them, although in the case of the Matrix I made a Herculean effort to find a useful way to get that thing going and was stymied by bugs, lack of basic features and design issues. It was the reason I bought Sonar 8 and I was deeply disappointed. I'd love nothing more than to see the Matrix overhauled and integrated into Skylight.

Notecrusher

Brandon Ryan [Cakewalk
]

Notecrusher


I agree w/ the OP. ProChannel is eye candy and a gimmick. Complete waste of development time. Too bad they didn't spend the cycles enhancing the problem-laden star feature from the previous release - the matrix view. Which, like ProChannel, has the same virtue: you can just not use it.

You can't use the ProChannel? It's weird, because I use it all the time. I also use the Matrix.

I meant you can choose not to use them, although in the case of the Matrix I made a Herculean effort to find a useful way to get that thing going and was stymied by bugs, lack of basic features and design issues. It was the reason I bought Sonar 8 and I was deeply disappointed. I'd love nothing more than to see the Matrix overhauled and integrated into Skylight.

The Matrix can no doubt benefit from improvements and this is something personally near and dear to my own heart. It will most certainly see focus in the future as we consider this an important and ongoing part of SONAR's creative toolset. My hope is that at least some of that disappointment you'vce felt will eventually be eased and replaced with functionality you desire.